r 


;J/t  Tv''^'^^^ 


,.n  "^'' 


(9 


DAMIEL  O'CONNELL. 


LIFE 

JO 

AND    SPEECHES 


OV 


DANIEL  O'CONNELL,  M.P 

(ILLUSTRATED.) 

INCLUDINO 

MANY  SPEECHES  If 01  IN  OTHER  COLLECTIONS, 

xayaaii  aoaiioa  Koxsoa 


J.    A.    McGEE,    PUBLISHER, 

7  Barclay  Street. 
1872. 

BOSTOIf  t*mM^«  t^UHATlt 

eptEb'i  Nij^  iiU^.  Mass. 


Entered  according  to  act  of  Congress  in  the  year  1872,  by 

J.  A.  McGEE, 
In  the  office  of  the  Librarian  of  Congress  at  Washington. 


126940 


A3^ 


CONTENTS. 


FAGB 

DANIEL  O'CONNELL,  M.  P.: 

Memoir  of  Mr.  O  Connell 11 

Speech  at  Limerick,  1812 13     "^ 

Eeply  to  Mr.  Bellew,  in  the  Catholic  Board,  1813 26 

On  requiring  securities  from  the  Catholics,  1813 38 

Speech  in  Defence  of  John  Magee,  July  27,  1813 54 

Speech  in  the  British  Catholic  Association,  on  the  defeat  of  the  / 

Emancipation  Bill,  May  26,  1825 122 

On  the  Treaty  of  Limerick,  1826 140      t^ 

Speech  at  the  Bar  of  the  House  of  Commons  to  maintain  his  Eight 

to  sit  as  member  for  Clare 152 

Speech  at  the  second  Clare  Election 165 

On  the  Coercion  Bill.     (House  of  Commons,  February  19,  1833). .. .  172 

Speech  at  Mullaghmast  Monster  Meeting,  September,  1843 182 

Speech  in  his  own  Defence,  at  the  Irish  State  Trials,  1844,  in  the 

Court  of  Queen's  Bench,  in  Ireland,  in  the  case  of  the  Queen 

rs.  Daniel  O'Connell  and  others 192 


SKETCH  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL,   M.  P. 


Daniel  O'Connell,  acknowledged  leader  of  the  Irish  nation  for 
the  most  important  period  of  the  nineteenth  century,  was  born  at 
a  place  called  Carhan,  beside  the  small  post-town  of  Cahirciveen, 
near  the  harbor  of  Valentia,  on  the  coast  of  Kerry,  in  1775. 

After  a  prehminary  course  at  a  school  near  Cove,  he  was  sent  to 
the  Continent,  and  was  successively  at  Louvain,  St.  Omer  and 
Douai,  till  the  French  Kevolution  compelled  his  return.  One  of 
the  effects  of  the  European  convulsion  was  a  relaxation  of  bigotry 
in  1792,  so  as  to  permit  Catholics  to  become  barristers.  Seizing 
the  opportunity,  O'Connell,  in  1794,  entered  himself  at  the  Middle 
Temple,  and  was  called  to  the  bar  in  the  memorable  year  when  his 
country  made  her  last  fearful  effort  to  free  herself  from  the  galling 
yoke  of  centuries. 

It  was  not  the  moment  for  a  young  untried  lawyer  to  enter  the 
field  of  public  affairs  ;  but  when,  in  1800,  the  so-calle  d  Union,  but 
real  provincialization  of  Ireland  was  proposed,  O'Connell  made  his 
first  appearance  as  a  pubHc  speaker,  and  organized  a  meeting  of 
Catholics,  which,  with  the  brutal  Major  Sirr  and  his  blood-stained 
soldiery  in  arms  around  them,  passed  bold  and  intrepid  resolutions, 
denouncing  that  iniquity,  which  it  became  henceforward  his  pur- 
pose through  life  to  attempt  to  undo.  That  he  failed  to  induce 
English  statesmen  and  the  English  parliament  to  forego  the  advan- 
tage gained  by  a  system  of  terror,  fraud,  and  bribery,  is  a  matter 
of  history.  Believing  England  honest,  and  ready  to  do  what  hon- 
esty required,  he  devoted  his  Ufe  to  agitation  for  the  Repeal  of  the 
Union.  One  great  point  he  gained — Cathohc  Emancipation, — and 
much  that  England  has  since  yielded  is  a  result  of  his  labors. 

O'Connell  as  a  barrister,  was  from  the  outset  remarkably  success- 
ful, and  rose  to  a  practice  of  the  utmost  extent.  He  rose  above 
partisanship  in  Irish  factions,  and  for  all  Irishmen,  without  distinc- 


10  MEMOIR  OF  DANIEL  o'CONNELL. 

tion  of  creed  or  blood,  claimed  equal  privileges.     A  recent  English 
estimate  of  O'Connell  justly  says  : 

"  His  style  as  a  pleader  was  the  best  perhaps  ever  known  at  the  Irish 
bar.  Others  have  been  more  polished,  more  elegant,  more  richly  meta- 
phorical ;  but  for  clear  force,  for  adroit  invention,  for  Demosthenic  terse- 
ness, concentrating  and  controUing  Irish  fervor,  for  the  impetuous  hail- 
storm of  words  beating  down  resistance,  we  doubt  whether  any  speaker 
of  a  nation  justly  famed  for  eloquence  has  been  the  master  of  O'Connell. 
Anecdotes  without  number  are  told  of  his  skill  with  witnesses,  of  his  au- 
dacity with  judges,  of  the  nimble  turns  and  unsurmised  devices  by  which 
he  snatched  verdicts  for  his  cUents,  and  his  success  as  an  orator  was  not 
confined  to  the  bar." 

As  an  orator  of  the  people,  addressing  vast  crowds  of  his  coun- 
trymen in  the  densely  packed  hall  or  under  the  canopy  of  heaven, 
where,  inspired  by  the  landscape  of  his  native  land,  he  poured 
forth  his  torrents  of  eloquence  ;  gathei'ing  a  whole  nation  under 
his  control,  he  has  no  equal  in  history.  For  more  than  twenty 
years  before  Catholic  Emancipation  the  burden  of  the  cause  was, 
he  justly  says,  thrown  upon  him.  For  more  than  twenty  years, 
there  was  not  a  day,  of  which  part  was  not  devoted  to  working  out 
the  Cathohc  cause.  He  aroused  the  torpid,  sustained  the  faint- 
hearted, restrained  the  impulsive,  conciliated  the  great,  and  in  less 
than  eight  years,  by  a  system  of  agitation  peculiarly  his  own, 
without  deviating  a  hair's  breadth  from  the  principles  of  peace  and 
loyalty,  which  he  always  maintained,  he  saw  the  gates  of  the  con- 
stitution flung  open  to  the  long  oppressed  CathoHcs. 

Then  the  great  Cathohc  lawyer,  the  great  agitator  and  popular 
speaker,  entered  the  parliament  of  the  United  Kingdom.  He  soon 
trampled  over  the  fear,  coldness  and  distrust  with  which  he  was 
at  first  received ;  and  no  speaker  was  heard  with  more  marked 
attention.  His  bold  step  in  standing  for  Clare  ;  his  speech  at  the 
bar  of  the  House,  made  his  name  known  throughout  the  world. 
From  May,  1829,  when  he  took  his  seat  as  Member  for  Clare,  till 
his  death,  he  continued  in  parhament,  representing  Kerry,  Dublin 
and  Cork  at  different  periods. 

In  1834,  he  began  the  Repeal  agitation,  by  moving  in  parhament 
for  a  repeal  of  the  Legislative  Union,  effected  in  1800  by  such  vio- 
lence and  fraud.  The  only  answer  made  in  the  House  was  the 
silly  one  of  Peel,  "We  will  not  consent  to  dismember  the  British 
empire,"  as  though  it  had  been  dismembered  before  the  Union. 


MEMOIR  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL.  11 

The  agitation  in  Ireland  again  drew  him  to  his  great  field,  the 
addresses  to  the  people.  Honored  almost  as  a  sovereign,  invested 
with  every  dignity  in  their  power,  he  led  on  the  movement,  calling 
meetings  of  hundreds  of  thousands,  till  the  government,  in  alarm, 
in  October,  1843,  forbade  by  proclamation  the  monster  meeting  at 
Clontarf. 

O'Connell  was  then  arrested  with  others,  on  a  charge  of  con- 
spiracy. The  old  system  began,  a  packed  jury,  venal  judges, 
hired  informers,  and  a  verdict  was  obtained,  which  the  House  of 
Lords,  with  some  sense  of  justice,  set  aside  as  a  mockery,  a  delu- 
sion, and  a  snare. 

IVIr.  O'Connell's  great  work  was  however  checked.  He  had  tried 
to  convince  his  countrymen  that  agitation,  the  legal  and  peaceful 
presenting  of  their  grievances,  would  ultimately  obtain  justice. 
The  government  taught  the  Irish  people  that  this  was  a  delusion  ; 
that  no  sense  of  justice  would  ever  induce  them  to  yield  ;  that  con- 
cessions to  Ireland  were  to  be  extorted  only  from  their  fears. 
O'ConneU's  pretended  conspiracy  was  a  hint  to  organize  a  real  one. 

Declining  health  indeed  withdrew  O'Connell  from  public  life ; 
his  former  career  was  but  feebly  resumed,  and  setting  out  in  1847 
on  a  pilgrimage  to  Rome,  he  died  at  Genoa,  on  the  15th  of  May. 
His  heart  was  borne  to  the  Eternal  City,  while  his  body  was  con- 
veyed back  to  the  island  he  loved  so  well 


SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL,  M.  P, 


SPEECH  AT  LIMERICK,  1812. 


I  FEEL  it  my  duty,  as  a  professed  agitator,  to  address  the 
meeting.  It  is  merely  in  the  exercise  of  my  office  of  agitation, 
that  I  think  it  necessary  to  say  a  few  words.  For  any  pur- 
pose of  illustration  or  argument,  further  discourse  is  useless : 
all  the  topics  which  the  present  period  suggested,  have  been 
treated  of  with  sound  judgment,  and  a  rare  fehcity  of  diction, 
by  my  respected  and  talented  friend  (Mr.  Roche)  ;  all  I  shall 
do  is,  to  add  a  few  observations  to  what  has  fallen  from  that 
gentleman  ;  and  whilst  I  sincerely  admire  the  happy  style  in 
which  he  has  treated  those  subjects,  I  feel  deep  regret  at  being 
unable  to  imitate  his  excellent  discourse. 

And,  first,  let  me  concur  with  him  in  congratulating  the 
Cathohcs  of  Limerick  on  the  progi'ess  our  great  cause  has 
made  since  we  were  last  assembled.  Since  that  period  our 
cause  has  not  rested  for  support  on  the  efforts  of  those  alone 
who  were  immediately  interested ;  no,  our  Protestant  brethren 
throughout  the  land  have  added  their  zealous  exertions  for  our 
emancipation.  They  have,  with  admirable  patriotism,  evinced 
their  desire  to  conciliate  by  serving  us,  and  I  am  sure  I  do  but 
justice  to  the  Catholics,  when  I  proclaim  our  gratitude,  as 
written  on  our  hearts,  and  to  be  extinguished  only  with  our 
lives. 

Nor  has  the  support  and  the  zeal  of  our  Protestant  brethren 
been  vain. and  barren.    No,  it  has  been  productive  of  great 


14  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

and  solid  advantages  ;  it  has  procured,  for  the  cause  of  reli- 
gious Hberty,  the  respect  even  of  the  most  bigoted  of  our  op- 
ponents ;  it  has  struck  down  English  prejudice  ;  it  has  con- 
vinced the  mistaken  honest ;  it  has  terrified  the  hypocritical 
knaves  ;  and  finally,  it  has  pronounced  for  us,  by  a  great  and 
triumphant  majority,  from  one  of  the  branches  of  the  legisla- 
ture, the  distinct  recognition  of  the  propriety  and  the  necessity 
of  conceding  justice  to  the  great  body  of  the  Irish  people. 

Let  us,  therefore,  rejoice  iu  our  mutual  success  ;  let  us  re- 
joice in  the  near  approach  of  freedom ;  let  us  rejoice  in  the 
prospect  of  soon  shaking  off  our  chains,  and  of  the  speedy  ex- 
tinction of  our  grievances.  But  above  all,  let  us  rejoice  at  the 
means  by  which  these  happy  effects  have  been  produced  ;  let 
us  doubly  rejoice,  because  they  afford  no  triumph  to  any  part 
of  the  Irish  nation  over  the  other — that  they  are  not  the  re- 
sult of  any  contention  among  ourselves  ;  but  constitute  a  vic- 
tory, obtained  for  the  Catholics  by  the  Protestants — that  they 
prove  the  liberahty  of  the  one,  and  require  the  eternal  grati- 
tude of  the  other — that  they  prove  and  promise  the  eternal 
dissolution  of  ancient  animosities  and  domestic  feuds,  and  af- 
ford to  every  Christian  and  to  every  patriot,  the  cheering  cer- 
tainty of  seeiQg  peace,  harmony,  and  benevolence  prevail  in 
that  country,  where  a  wicked  and  perverted  policy  has  so  long 
and  so  fatally  propagated  and  encouraged  dissension,  discord, 
and  rancor. 

We  owe  it  to  the  hberality  of  the  Irish  Protestants — to  the 
zeal  of  the  Irish  Presbyterians — to  the  friendly  exertion  of  the 
Irish  Quakers  ;  we  owe,  to  the  cordial  re-union  of  every  sect 
and  denomination  of  Irish  Christians,  the  progress  of  our  cause. 
They  have  procured  for  us  the  solemn  and  distinct  promise 
and  pledge  of  the  House  of  Commons — they  almost  obtained 
for  us  a  similar  declaration  from  the  House  of  Lords.  It  was 
lost  by  the  petty  majority  of  one — it  was  lost  by  a  majority,  not 
of  those  who  hstened  to  the  absurd  prosings  of  Lord  Eldon, 
to  the  bigoted  and  turbid  declamation  of  that  Enghsh  Chief 
Justice,  whose  sentiments  so  forcibly  recall  the  memory  of  the 
star-chamber  ;  not  of  those  who  were  able  to  compare  the  va- 
pid or  violent  folly  of  the  one  party,  with  the  statesman- 
like sentiments,  the  profound  arguments,  the  splendid  elo- 


SPEECH  AT  LIMERICK.  15 

quence  of  the  Marquis  "Wellesley.  Not  of  tliose  who  heard 
the  reasonings  of  our  other  illustrious  advocates ;  but  by 
a  majority  of  men  who  acted  upon  preconceived  opinions,  or, 
from  a  distance,  carried  into  effect  their  bigotry,  or,  perhaps, 
worse  propensities — who  availed  themselves  of  that  absurd 
privilege  of  the  peerage,  which  enables  those  to  decide  who 
have  not  heard — which  permits  men  to  pronounce  upon  sub- 
jects they  have  not  discussed — and  allows  a  final  determina- 
tion to  precede  argument. 

It  was  not,  however,  to  this  privilege  alone,  that  our  want 
of  success  was  to  be  attributed.  The  very  principle  upon 
which  the  present  administration  has  been  formed,  was  brought 
into  immediate  action,  and  with  success  ;  for,  in  the  latter 
periods  of  the  present  reign,  every  administration  has  had  a 
distinct  principle  upon  which  it  was  formed,  and  which  serves 
the  historian  to  explain  all  its  movements.  Thus,  the  princi- 
ple of  the  Pitt  administration  was — to  deprive  the  people  of  all 
share  in  the  government,  and  to  vest  aU  power  and  authority 
in  the  crown.  In  short,  Pitt's  views  amounted  to  unqualified 
despotism.  This  great  object  he  steadily  pursued  through  his 
ill-starred  career.  It  is  true  he  encouraged  commerce,  but  it 
was  for  the  purposes  of  taxation  ;  and  he  used  taxation  for 
the  purposes  of  corruption ;  he  assisted  the  merchants,  as  long 
as  he  could,  to  grow  rich,  and  they  lauded  him  ;  he  bought 
the  people  with  their  own  money,  and  they  praised  him.  Each 
succeeding  day  produced  some  new  inroad  on  the  constitu- 
tion ;  and  the  alarm  which  he  excited,  by  reason  of  the  bloody 
workings  of  the  French  revolution,  enabled  him  to  rule  the 
land  with  uncontrolled  sway  ;  he  had  bequeathed  to  his  suc- 
cessor the  accumulated  power  of  the  crown — a  power  which 
must  be  great,  if  it  can  sustain  the  nonentities  of  the  present 
administration. 

The  principle  of  Pitt's  administration  was  despotism — the 
principle  of  Perceval's  administration  was  peculating  bigotiy — 
bigoted  peculation !  In  the  name  of  the  Lord  he  plundered 
the  people.  Pious  and  enhghtened  statesman  !  he  would  tako 
their  money  only  for  the  good  of  their  souls. 

The  principle  of  the  present  administration  is  still  more  ob- 
vious.    It  has  unequivocally  disclosed  itself  in  aU  its  move- 


16  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

ments — it  is  simple  and  single — it  consists  in  falsehood.  False- 
hood is  the  bond  and  link  that  connects  this  ministry  in  office. 
Some  of  them  pretend  to  be  our  friends — you  know  it  is  not 
true — they  are  only  our  worse  enemies  for  the  hypocrisy. 
They  declare  that  the  Catholic  question  is  no  longer  opposed 
by  the  cabiaet — that  it  is  left  to  the  discretion  of  each  indi- 
vidual retainer.  The  fact  is  otherwise — and  their  retainers, 
though  not  commanded,  as  formerly,  are  carefuUy  advised  to 
vote  against  us.  ° 

The  minister,  Lord  Castlereagh,  is  reported  to  have  said  in 
the  House  of  Commons,  that  in  the  year  1797  and  1798,  there 
was  no  torture  in  Ireland,  to  the  knowledge  of  government !  Is 
it  really  possible  that  such  an  assertion  was  used  ?  You  hear 
of  it  with  astonishment.  All  Ireland  must  shudder,  that  any 
man  could  be  found  thus  to  assert.  Good  God !  of  what  mate- 
rials must  that  man  be  made  who  could  say  so  ?  I  restrain  my 
indignation — I  withhold  all  expressions  of  surprise — the  simple 
statement  that  such  an  assertion  was  used,  exceeds,  in  reply,  the 
strongest  language  of  reprobation.  But  there  is  no  man  so  stu- 
pid as  not  to  recognize  the  principle  which  I  have  so  justly  at- 
tributed to  this  administration. 

What !  No  torture  !  Great  God  !  No  torture  !  Within  the 
walls  of  your  city  was  there  no  torture  ?  Could  not  Colonel 
Verekerhave  informed  Lord  Castlereagh,  that  the  lash  resound- 
ed in  the  streets  even  of  Limerick,  and  that  the  human  groan  as- 
sailed the  wearied  ear  of  humanity  ?  Yet  I  am  ready  to  give 
the  gallant  colonel  every  credit  he  deserves ;  and,  therefore, 
I  recall  to  your  grateful  recollection  the  day  when  he 
risked  his  hfe  to  punish  one  of  the  instruments  of  torture. 
Colonel  Vereker  can  tell  whether  it  be  not  true,  that  in  the 
streets  of  your  city,  the  servant  of  his  relation,  Mrs.  Rosslewen, 
was  not  tortured — ^whether  he  v/as  not  tortured  first,  for  the 
crime  of  having  expressed  a  single  sentiment  of  compassion, 
and  next  because  Colonel  Vereker  interfered  for  him. 

But  there  is  an  additional  fact  which  is  not  so  generally  known, 
which,  perhaps,  Colonel  Vereker  himself  does  not  know,  and 
which  I  have  learned  from  a  highly  respectable  clergyman, 
that  this  sad  victim  of  the  system  of  torture,  which  Lord 
Castlereagh  denied,  was,  at  the  time  he  was  scourged,  in  an  in- 


SPEECH  AT  LIMERICK.  17 

firm  state  of  health — that  the  flogging  inflicted  on  him  deprived 
him  of  all  understanding,  and  that  within  a  few  months  he 
died  insane,  and  without  having  recovered  a  shadow  of  reason. 

But  why,  out  of  the  myriads  of  victims,  do  I  select  a  soUtary 
instance  ?  Because  he  was  a  native  of  your  city,  and  his  only 
ofi'ence  an  expression  of  compassion.  I  might  teU  you,  did  you 
not  already  know  it,  that  in  Dublin  there  were,  for  weeks,  tliree 
permanent  triangles,  constantly  suppHed  with  the  victims  of  a 
promiscuous  choice  made  by  the  army,  the  yeomanry,  the  police 
constables,  and  the  Orange  lodges ;  that  the  shrieks  of  the  tor- 
tured must  have  literally  resounded  in  the  state  apartments  of 
the  Castle ;  and  that  along  by  the  gate  of  the  Castle  yard,  a  hu- 
man being,  naked,  tarred,  feathered,  with  one  ear  cut  off,  and 
the  blood  streaming  from  his  lacerated  oack,  has  been  hunted 
by  a  troop  of  barbarians  ! 

Why  do  I  disgust  you  with  these  horrible  recollections  ?  You 
want  not  the  proof  of  the  principle  of  delusion  on  which  the  pre- 
sent administration  exists.  In  your  own  affairs  you  have  abun- 
dant evidence  of  it.  The  fact  is,  that  the  proxies  in  the  Lords 
would  never  have  produced  a  majority  even  of  one  against  Lord 
WeUesley's  motion,  but  for  the  exertion  of  the  vital  principle  of 
the  administration.  The  ministry  got  the  majority  of  one.  The 
pious  Lord  Eldon,  with  all  his  conscience  and  his  calculations, 
and  that  immaculate  distributor  of  criminal  justice,  Lord  Ellen- 
borough,  were  in  a  majority  of  one.  By  what  holy  means  think 
you  ?  Why,  by  the  aid  of  that  wliich  cannot  be  described  in 
dignified  language — by  the  aid  of  a  lie — a  false,  positive,  pal- 
pable lie ! 

This  manoeuvre  was  resorted  to — a  scheme  worthy  of  its 
authors — they  had  perceived  the  effects  of  the  manly  and  dig- 
nified resolutions  of  the  18th  of  June.  These  resolutions  had 
actually  terrified  our  enemies,  whilst  they  cheered  those  noble 
and  illustrious  friends  who  had  preferred  the  wishes  and  wants 
of  the  people  of  Ireland  to  the  gratification  of  paltry  and  dis- 
graceful minions.  The  manoeuvre — the  scheme,  was  calcu- 
lated to  get  rid  of  the  effect  of  those  resolutions,  nay,  to  turn 
their  force  against  us,  and  thus  was  the  pious  fraud  effected. 

There  is,  you  have  heard,  a  newspaper,  in  the  permanent  pay 
of  peculation  and  corruption,  printed  in  London,  under  the 


18  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

name  of  the  Courier,  a  paper  worthy  the  meridian  of  Constan- 
tinople, at  its  highest  tide  of  despotism.  This  paper  was  di- 
rected to  assert  the  receipt  of  a  letter  from  Dublin,  from 
excellent  authority,  declaring,'- 1  know  not  how  many  peers, 
sons  of  peers,  and  baronets  had  retracted  the  resolutions  of 
the  18th  of  June ;  that  those  resolutions  were  carried  by  sur- 
prise, and  that  they  had  been  actually  rescinded  at  a  subse- 
quent meeting. 

Never  did  human  baseness  invent  a  more  gross  untruth; 
never  did  a  more  unfounded  lie  fall  from  the  father  of  false- 
hood ;  never  did  human  turpitude  submit  to  become  the  vehicle 
of  so  "glaring"  a  dereliction  fi-om  truth.  But  the  Courier 
received  its  pay,  and  it  was  ready  to  earn  the  wages  of  its  pros- 
titution. It  did  so — it  published  the  foul  falsehoods  with  the 
full  knowledge  of  their  falsehood ;  it  pubhshed  them  in  two  edi- 
tions, the  day  before  and  the  day  of  the  debate — at  a  period 
when  inquiry  was  useless — when  a  contradiction  from  author- 
ity could  not  arrive  ;  at  that  moment  this  base  trick  was  played, 
through  the  intervention  of  that  newspaper,  upon  the  British 
pubhc ! 

Will  that  public  go  too  far  when  they  charge  this  impure 
stratagem  on  those  whose  purposes  it  served  ?  Why,  even  in 
this  country,  the  administration  deems  it  necessary  to  give,  for 
the  support  of  one  miserable  paper,  two  places — one  of  five, 
and  the  other  of  eight  hundred  a  year — the  stamp  duty  remit- 
ted— the  proclamations  paid  for  as  advertisements — and  a  per- 
manent bonus  of  one  thousand  pounds  per  annum !  If  the 
bribe  here  be  so  high,  what  must  it  be  in  England,  where 
the  toil  is  so  much  greater  ?  And,  think  you,  then,  that  the 
Courier  published,  unsanctioned  by  its  paymasters,  this  useful 
He? 

I  come  now  to  the  next  stage  in  the  system  of  delusion ;  it 
is  that  which  my  fi-iend,  Mr.  O'Neil,  has  noticed.  He  has  pow- 
erfully exposed  to  you  the  absurdity  of  crediting  the  ministe- 
rial newspapers,  when  they  informed  you  that  the  member  for 
Limerick  had  stated  in  the  House  of  Commons,  that  the  com- 
mercial interests  of  Limerick  were  opposed  to  the  Catholic 
claims.  Sir,  for  my  part,  I  entirely  agree  with  Mr.  O'Neil ;  I 
am  sure  Colonel  Yereker  said  no  such  thing ;  he  is  a  brave 


SPEECH  AT  LIMEEIOK.  19 

man,  aucl,  therefore,  a  man  of  truth  ;  he  is  probably  a  pleasant 
friend,  and  he  has  those  manly  traits  about  him,  which  make  it 
not  unpleasant  to  oppose  him  as  an  enemy  ;  I  like  the  candor 
of  his  character,  and  our  opposition  to  him  should  assume  the 
same  frankness,  and  openness,  and  perfect  determination.  He 
well  knows  that  a  great  part  of  the  commercial  interests  of 
Limerick  is  in  the  hands  of  the  Catholics — that  the  Quakers 
of  Limerick,  who  possess  almost  the  residue  of  trade,  are 
friendly  to  us,  and  that,  with  tlie  exception  of  the  "  tag,  rag, 
and  bob -tail "  of  the  corporation,  there  is  not  to  be  found 
amongst  the  men  who  ought  to  be  his  constituents  a  single  ex- 
ception to  Hberality. 

There  remains  another  delusion  ;  it  is  the  darling  deception 
of  this  ministry — that  which  has  reconciled  the  toleration  of 
Lord  Castlereagh  with  the  intolerance  of  Lord  Liverpool ;  it  is 
that  which  has  sanctified  the  connection  between  both,  and  the 
place-procuring,  prayer-mumbhng  Wilberforce  ;  it  consists  in 
sanctions  and  securities.  The  Catholics  may  be  emancipated, 
say  ministers  in  pubhc,  but  they  must  give  securities  ;  by 
securities,  say  the  same  ministers  in  private,  to  their  support- 
ing bigots,  we  mean  nothing  definite,  but  something  that  shall 
certainly  be  inconsistent  with  the  Popish  rehgion — nothing 
shall  be  a  security  which  they  can  possibly  concede — and  we 
shall  deceive  them  and  secure  you,  whilst  we  carry  the  air  of 
liberality  and  toleration. 

And  can  there  be  any  honest  man  deceived  by  the  cant  and 
cry  for  securities  ? — is  there  any  man  that  believes  that  there 
is  safety  in  oppression,  contumely,  and  insult,  and  that  secu- 
rity is  necessary  against  protection,  liber ahty  and  conciKation  ? 
— does  any  man  really  suppose,  that  there  is  no  danger  from 
the  continuance  of  unjust  grievance  and  exasperating  intoler- 
ance ;  and  that  security  is  wanting  against  the  effects  of  justice 
and  perfect  toleration  ?  Wlio  is  it  that  is  idiot  enough  to  be- 
lieve, that  he  is  quite  safe  in  dissension,  disunion,  and  animos- 
ity; and  wants  a  protection  against  harmony,  benevolence,  and 
charity  ? — that  in  hatred  there  is  safety — ^in  affection,  ruin  ? — 
iJiat  now,  that  we  are  excluded  from  the  constitution,  we  may 
be  loyal — but  that  if  we  were  entrusted,  personally,  in  its 
safety,  we  shall  wish  to  destroy  it  ? 


20  SELECT  SPEECHES    OF  DANIEL  0  CONNELL. 

But  this  is  a  pitiful  delusion :  there  was,  indeed,  a  time, 
when  "sanctions  and  securities"  might  have  been  deemed 
necessary — when  the  Cathohc  was  treated  as  an  enemy  to  man 
and  to  God — when  his  property  was  the  prey  of  legahzed  plun- 
der— ^his  religion  and  its  sacred  ministers,  the  object  of  legal- 
ized persecution ! — when,  in  defiance  and  contempt  of  the  dic- 
tates of  Justice,  and  the  faith  of  treaties — and  I  attest  the  ven- 
erable city,  in  which  I  stand,  that  solemn  treaties  were  basely 
violated — the  Enghsh  faction  in  the  land  turned  the  Protestant 
into  an  intolerant  and  murderous  bigot,  in  order  that  it  might, 
in  secmity,  plunder  that  very  Protestant,  and  oppress  his  and 
our  common  country  !  Poor  neglected  Ireland !  At  that  pe- 
riod, securities  might  be  supposed  wanting ;  the  people  of  Ire- 
land— the  Catholic  population  of  Ireland  were  then  as  brave 
and  as  strong,  comparatively,  as  they  are  at  present ;  and  the 
country  then  afforded  advantages  for  the  desultory  warfare  of 
a  vahant  peasantry,  which,  fortunately,  have  since  been  ex- 
ploded by  increasing  cultivation. 

At  the  period  to  which  I  allude,  the  Stuart  family  were  still 
in  existence ;  they  possessed  a  strong  claim  to  the  exaggerating 
allegiance  and  unbending  fidehty  of  the  Irish  people.  Every 
right  that  hereditary  descent  could  give  the  royal  race  of  Stu- 
art, they  possessed — iu  private  life,  too,  they  were  endeared  to 
the  Irish,  because  they  were,  even  the  worst  of  them,  gentle- 
men. But  they  had  still  stronger  claims  on  the  sympathy  and 
generosity  of  the  Irish :  they  had  been  exalted  and  were  fallen 
— they  had  possessed  thrones  and  kingdoms,  and  were  then  in 
poverty  and  humiliation.  All  the  enthusiastic  sympatliies  of 
the  Irish  heart  were  roused  for  them — and  all  the  powerful  mo- 
tives of  personal  interest  bore,  in  the  same  channel,  the  resto- 
ration of  their  rights — the  triumph  of  their  religion,  the  resti- 
tution of  their  ancient  inheritances,  would  then  have  been  the 
certain  and  immediate  consequences  of  the  success  of  the  Stu- 
art family,  in  their  pretensions  to  the  throne. 

At  the  period  to  which  I  allude,  the  Catholic  clergy  were 
bound  by  no  oath  of  allegiance  ;  to  be  a  dignitary  of  the 
Catholic  church  in  Ireland,  was  a  transportable  felony — and 
the  oath  of  allegiance  was  so  intermingled  with  religious 
tenets,  that  no  clergyman  or  layman  of  the  Catholic  persua- 


SPEECH  AT   LIMEEICK.  21 

sion  could  possibly  take  it.  At  that  period,  the  Catholic  clergy 
were  aU  educated  in  foreign  countries,  under  the  eye  of  the 
Pope,  and  witliin  the  inspection  of  the  house  of  Stuart. 
From  fifty-eight  colleges  and  convents,  on  the  Continent,  did 
the  Catholic  clergy  repair  to  meet,  for  the  sake  of  tlieir  God, 
poverty,  persecution,  contumely,  and,  not  unfrequently,  death, 
in  then'  native  land.  They  were  often  hunted  like  wild 
beasts,  and  never  could  claim  any  protection  from  the  law ! 
That — that  was  a  period,  when  securities  might  well  have 
been  necessarj' — when  sanctions  and  securities  might  well 
have  been  requisite. 

But  what  was  the  fact? — what  was  the  truth  which  his- 
tory vouches  ?  Why,  that  the  clergy  and  laity  of  the  Irish 
Cathohcs,  having  once  submitted  to  the  new  government — 
having  once  plighted  their  ever  unbroken  faith  to  King  Wil- 
ham  and  his  successors — having  once  submitted  to  that  great 
constitutional  principle,  that  in  extreme  cases  the  will  of  the 
people  is  the  sole  law — that  in  extreme  cases  the  people 
have  the  clear  and  undoubted  right  to  cashier  a  tyrant,  and 
provide  a  substitute  on  the  throne — the  Irish  Cathohcs,  having 
fought  for  their  legitimate  sovereign,  until  he,  himseK,  and,  not 
they,  fled  from  the  strife — adopted,  by  treaty,  his  English  suc- 
cessor, though  not  his  heir — transferred  to  that  successor,  and 
the  inheritors  of  his  throne,  their  allegiance.  They  have  pre- 
served their  covenant — with  all  the  temptations  and  powerful 
motives  to  disaffection,  they  fulfilled  their  part  of  the  social 
contract,  even  in  despite  of  its  violation  by  the  other  party. 

How  do  I  prove  the  continued  loyalty  of  the  Cathohcs  of 
Ireland  under  every  persecution?  I  do  not  appeal  for  any 
proofs  to  their  own  records,  however  genuine — I  appeal 
merely  to  the  testimony  of  their  rulers  and  their  ene- 
mies— I  appeal  to  the  letters  of  Primate  Boulter — to  the 
state-papers  of  the  humane  and  patriotic  Chesterfield.  I 
have  their  loyalty  through  the  admissions  of  every  secretary 
and  governor  of  Ireland,  until  it  is  finally  and  conclusively 
put  on  record  by  the  legislature  of  Ireland  itself.  The  relax- 
ing statutes  expressly  declare,  that  the  penal  laws  ought  to  be 
repealed — not  from  motives  of  pohcy  or  growing  hberahty, 
but  (I  quote  the  words,)  "  because  of  the  long-continued  and 


22  SELECT    SPEECHES   OF  DAKIEL   O'CONNELL. 

uninterrupted  loyalty  of  tbe  Catholics."  Tliis  is  the  consum- 
mation of  my  proof — and  I  defy  the  veriest  disciple  of  the 
doctrine  of  delusion  to  overturn  it. 

But  as  the  Cathohcs  were  faithful  in  those  dismal  and  per- 
secuting periods — when  they  were  exasperated  by  the  ema- 
ciating cruelty  of  barbarous  law  and  wretched  policy — as  they 
were  then  faithful,  notwithstanding  every  temporal  and  every 
rehgious  temptation  and  excitement  to  the  contrary,  is  it  in 
human  credulity  to  beheve  my  Lord  Castlereagh,  when  he 
asserts  that  securities  are  now  necessary  ?  Now,  that  the  ill- 
fated  house  of  Stuart  is  extinct— and  had  it  not  been  extinct 
I  should  have  been  silent  as  to  what  their  claims  were — now, 
that  the  will  of  the  people,  and  the  right  of  hereditary  succes- 
sion are  not  to  be  separated — now,  that  the  Catholic  clergy 
are  educated  in  Ireland  and  are  all  bound  by  then-  oaths  of 
allegiance  to  that  throne  and  constitution,  which,  in  the  room 
of  persecution,  gives  them  protection  and  security — now,  that 
all  claims  upon  forfeited  property  are  totally  extinguished 
in  the  impenetrable  night  of  obscurity  and  oblivion — now,  that 
the  CathoHc  nobility  and  gentry  are  in  the  enjoyment  of  many 
privileges  and  franchises,  and  that  the  full  participation  of  the 
constitution  opens  upon  us  in  close  and  cheering  prospect — 
shall  we  be  told  that  securities  are  now  expedient,  though 
they  were  Jieretofore  unnecessary  ?  Oh  !  it  is  a  base  and  das- 
tardly insult  upon  our  understandings,  and  on  our  principles, 
and  one  which  each  of  us  would,  in  private  life,  resent — as  in 
pubhc  we  proclaim  it  to  the  contempt  and  execration  of  the 
universe. 

Long  as  I  have  trepassed  on  you,  I  cannot  yet  close  :  I  have 
a  word  to  address  to  you  upon  your  own  conduct.  The  repre- 
sentative for  your  city,  Colonel  Vereker,  has  openly  opposed 
your  liberties — ^lie  has  opposed  even  the  consideration  of  your 
claims.  You  are  beings,  to  be  sure,  with  human  countenances, 
and  the  hmbs  of  men — but  you  are  not  men — the  iron  has  en- 
tered into  your  souls,  and  branded  the  name  of  slave  upon 
them,  if  you  submit  to  be  thus  trampled  on  !  His  opposition  to 
you  is  decided — meet  him  with  a  similar,  and,  if  possible,  a 
superior  hostility.  You  deserve  not  freedom,  you,  citizens  of 
Limerick,  with  the  monuments  of  the  valor  of  your  ancestoi  / 


SPEECH   AT  LIMERICK.  23 

around  you — jou  are  less  than  men,  if  my  feeble  tongue  be  re- 
quisite to  rouse  you  into  activity.  Your  city  is,  at  present, 
nearly  a  close  borough — do  but  will  it,  and  you  make  it  free. 

I  know  legal  obstacles  have  been  thrown  in  your  way — I 
know  that,  for  months  past,  the  Kecorder  has  sat  alone  at  the 
sessions — that  he  has  not  only  tried  cases,  in  the  absence  of  any 
other  magistrate,  which  he  is  not  authorized  by  law  to  do,  but 
that  he  has  solely  opened  and  adjourned  the  sessions,  which,  in 
my  opinion,  he  is  clearly  unwarranted  in  doing  ;  he  has,  by  this 
means,  I  know,  delayed  the  registry  of  your  fi*eeholds,  because 
two  magistrates  are  necessary  for  that  purpose  :  I  have,  howev- 
er, the  satisfaction  to  tell  you,  that  the  Court  of  King's  Bench 
will,  in  the  next  term,  have  to  determine  on  the  legality  of  his 
conduct,  and  of  that  of  the  other  charter  magistrates,  who  have 
banished  themselves,  I  understand,  from  the  Sessions  Court, 
since  the  registry  has  been  spoken  of !  They  shall  ,be  served 
with  the  regular  notices ;  and,  depend  upon  it,  this  scheme 
cannot  long  retard  you. 

I  speak  to  you  on  this  subject  as  a  lawyer — you  can  best 
judge  in  what  estimation  my  opinion  is  amongst  you — but 
such  as  it  is,  I  pledge  it  to  you,  that  you  can  easily  obviate  the 
present  obstacles  to  the  registry  of  your  freeholds.  I  can  also 
assure  you  that  the  constitution  of  your  city  is  perfectly  free — 
that  the  sons  of  freemen,  and  all  those  who  have  served  an  ap- 
prenticeship to  a  freeman,  are  aU  entitled  to  their  freedom,  and 
to  vote  for  the  representation  of  your  city. 

I  can  tell  you  more  :  that  if  you  bring  your  candidate  to  a 
poll,  your  adversary  will  be  deprived  of  any  aid  from  non-res- 
ident or  occasional  freemen  ;  we  wUl  strike  off  his  list  the  free- 
men from  Gort  and  Galway,  the  freemen  from  the  band,  and 
many  from  the  battalion  of  the  city  of  Limerick  militia. 

In  short,  the  opening  of  the  borough  is  a  matter  of  little 
difficulty.  If  you  will  but  form  a  committee,  and  collect 
funds,  in  your  opulent  city,  you  will  soon  have  a  representative 
ready  to  obey  your  voice — you  cannot  want  a  candidate.  If 
the  emancipation  bill  passes  next  sessions,  as  it  is  so  likely  to 
do,  and  that  no  other  candidate  offers,  I  mj^self  will  bring 
your  present  number  to  the  poll.  I  probably  will  have  little 
chance  of  success — but  I  will  have  the  satisfaction  of  showing 


24  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL    O'CONNELL. 

this  city,  and  the  county,  what  the  free-born  mind  might 
achieve  if  it  were  properly  seconded. 

I  conclude  by  conjuring  you  to  exert  yourselves  ;  waste  not 
your  just  resentments  in  idle  applause  at  the  prospect  I  open 
to  you  ;  let  not  the  feeling  of  the  moment  be  calumniated  as 
a  hasty  ebullition  of  anger ;  let  it  not  be  transitoiy,  as  our 
resentments  generally  are,  but  let  us  remember  ourselves,  our 
children  and  our  country  ! 

Let  me  not,  however,  close,  without  obviating  any  calumny 
that  may  be  flung  upon  my  motives.  I  can  easily  pledge  my- 
self to  you  that  they  are  disinterested  and  pure — I  trust  they 
are  more.  My  object  in  the  attainment  of  emancipation  is  in 
nothing  personal,  save  in  the  feelings  which  parental  love 
inspires  and  gratifies.  I  am,  I  trust,  actuated  by  that  sense 
of  Christianity  which  teaches  us  that  the  first  duty  of  our 
rehgion  is  benevolence  and  universal  charity ;  I  am,  I  know, 
actuated  by  the  determination  to  rescue  our  common  country 
from  the  weakness,  the  insecurity,  which  dissension  and  reli- 
gious animosity  produce  and  tend  to  perpetuate  ;  I  wish  to 
see  the  strength  of  the  island — this  unconquered,  this  uncon- 
querable island — combined  to  resist  the  mighty  foe  of  free- 
dom, the  extinguisher  of  civil  liberty,  who  rules  the  Con- 
tinent from  Petersburgh  to  the  verge  of  the  Irish  bayo- 
nets in  Spain.  It  is  his  interest,  it  is  a  species  of  duty 
he  owes  to  his  family — to  that  powerful  house  which  he 
has  established  on  the  ruins  of  the  thrones  and  domina- 
tions of  Europe — to  extinguish,  forever,  representative  and 
popular  government  in  these  countries ;  he  has  the  same 
direct  intent  which  the  Roman  general  had  to  invade  our  be- 
loved country — "  Ut  libertas  veluti  et  conspectu."  His  power 
can  be  resisted  only  by  combining  your  physical  force  with 
your  enthusiastic  and  undaunted  hearts. 

There  is  liberty  amongst  you  still.  I  could  not  talk  as  I 
do,  of  the  Livei-jjools  and  Castlereaghs,  of  his  court,  even  if 
he  had  the  folly  to  employ  such  things — I  wish  he  had  ;  you 
have  the  protection  of  many  a  salutary  law — of  that  palla- 
dium of  personal  liberty — the  trial  by  jury.  I  wish  to  ensure 
your  Hberties,  to  measure  your  interests  on  the  present  order 
of  the  state,  that  we  may  protect  the  very  men  that  oppress  us. 


SPEECH  AT  LIMERICK.  25 

Yes,  if  Ireland  be  fairly  roused  to  the  battle  of  the  country 
and  of  freedom,  all  is  safe.  Britain  has  been  often  conquered  : 
the  Romans  conquered  her — the  Saxons  conquered  her — 
the  Normans  conquered  her — in  short,  whenever  she  was  in- 
vaded, she  was  conquered.  But  our  country  was  never  sub- 
dued ;  we  never  lost  our  hberties  in  battle,  nor  did  we  ever 
submit  to  armed  conquerors.  It  is  true,  the  old  inhabitants 
lost  their  country  in  piece-meal,  by  fraud  and  treachery  ;  they 
relied  upon  the  faith  of  men,  who  never,  never  observed  a 
treaty  with  them,  imtil  a  new  and  mixed  race  has  sprung  up, 
in  dissension  and  discord ;  but  the  Irish  heart  and  soul  still 
predominate  and  pervade  the  sons  of  the  oppressors  them- 
selves. The  generosity,  the  native  bravery,  the  innate  fidelity, 
the  enthusiastic  love  of  whatever  is  great  and  noble — those 
splendid  characteristics  of  the  Irish  mind  remain  as  the  im- 
perishable relics  of  our  country's  former  greatness — of  that  il- 
lustrious period,  when  she  was  the  hght  and  the  glory  of  barbar- 
ous Europe — when  the  nations  around  sought  for  instruction 
and  example  in  her  numerous  seminaries — and  when  the  civil- 
ization and  religion  of  all  Europe  were  preserved  in  her  alone. 

You  will,  my  friends,  defend  her — ^you  may  die,  but  jou 
cannot  yield  to  any  foreign  invader.  Whatever  be  my  fate,  I 
shall  be  happy,  wliilst  I  Hve,  in  reviving  amongst  you  the  love 
and  admiration  of  your  native  land,  and  in  calling  upon  Irish- 
men— no  matter  how  they  may  worship  their  common  God — 
to  sacrifice  every  contemptible  prejudice  on  the  altar  of  their 
common  country.  For  myself,  I  shall  conclude,  by  expressing 
the  sentiment  that  throbs  in  my  heart — I  shall  express  it  in 
the  language  of  a  young  bard  of  Erin,  and  my  beloved  friend, 
whose  dehghtful  muse  has  the  sound  of  the  ancient  min- 
strelsy- 


"■b"^ 


"  Still  slialt  tliou  be  my  midnight  dream — 
Thy  glory  still  my  waking  theme  ; 
And  ev'ry  thought  and  wish  of  mine, 
XJncouquered  Erin,  shall  be  thine  !" 


26  SELECT   SrEECHES   OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

EEPLY  TO  MR.  BELLEW, 
IN   THE    CATHOLIC    BOARD,    1813. 


At  this  late  hour,  and  in  the  exhausted  state  of  the  meet- 
ing, it  requires  all  the  impulse  of  duty  to  overcome  my  de- 
termination to  allow  the  debate  to  be  closed  without  any  re- 
ply ;  but  a  speech  has  been  delivered  by  the  learned  gentle- 
man (Mr.  Bellew),  which  I  cannot  suffer  to  pass  without  fur- 
ther ansAver. 

My  eloquent  friend,  Mr.  O'Gorman,  has  already  powerfully 
exposed  some  of  its  fallacies  ;  but  there  were  topics  involved  in 
that  speech  which  he  has  not  touched  upon,  and  which,  it 
seems  to  me,  I  owe  it  to  the  Catholics  and  to  Ireland  to  at- 
tempt to  refute. 

It  was  a  speech  of  much  talent,  and  much  labor  and  prepar- 
ation. 

Mr.  Bellew  declared  that  he  had  spoken  extempore. 

Well,  (said  Mr.  O'Connell,)  it  was,  certainly,  an  able  speech, 
and  v/e  shall  see  whether  this  extempore  effort  of  the  learned 
gentleman  will  appear  in  the  newspapers  to-morrow,  in  the 
precise  words  in  which  it  was  uttered  this  day.  I  have  no 
skill  in  prophecy,  if  it  does  not  happen  ;  and  if  it  does  so  hap- 
pen, it  will  certainly  be  a  greater  mu'acle  than  that  the  learned 
gentleman  should  have  made  an  artful  and  ingenuous,  though. 
I  confess,  I  think  a  very  mischievous  speech,  without  prepara- 
tion. 

I  beg  to  say,  that,  in  repljang  to  him  and  to  the  other 
supporters  of  the  amendment,  I  mean  to  speak  with  great 
personal  respect  of  them  ;  but  that  I  feel  myself  bound  to 
treat  their  arguments  with  no  small  degree  of  reprehension. 
The  learned  gentleman  naturally  claims  the  greater  part  of 
my  attention.  The  ingenuity  with  which  he  has,  I  trust, 
gratuitously  advocated  our  bigoted  enemies,  and  the  abun- 
dance in  which  he  has  dealt  out  insinuations  against  tho 
Cathohcs  of  Ireland,  entitle  his  discourse  to  the  first  place 
in  my  reprobation.  Yet  I  shall  take  the  liberty  of  saying  a 
passing  word  of  the  other  speakers,  before  I  arrive  at  him ; 


REPLY  TO  MR.   BELLEW.  "  27 

lie  sliall  be  last,  but  I  promise  him,  not  least  in  my  consid- 
eration. 

The  opposition  to  the  general  vote  of  thanks  to  the  bishops 
was  led  by  my  friend,  Mr.  Hussey.  I  attended  to  his  speech 
with  that  regard  which  I  always  feel  for  anything  that  comes 
fi'om  him  ;  I  attended  to  it  in  the  expectation  of  hearing  fi-om 
his  shi'ewd  and  distinct  mind  something  like  argument  or  rea- 
soning against  this  expression  of  gratitude  to  our  prelates. 
But,  my  lord,  I  was  entirely  disappointed  ;  argument  there  was 
not  any — reasoning  there  was  none  ;  the  sum  and  substance  of 
his  discourse  was  hterally  this,  that  he  (Mr.  Hussey)  is  a  man 
of  a  prudent  and  economical  turn  of  mind,  that  he  sets  a  great 
value  on  everything  that  is  good,  that  praise  is  excellent,  and, 
therefore,  he  is  disposed  to  be  even  stingy  and  niggard  of  it ; 
that  my  motion  contains  four  times  too  much  of  that  excellent 
article,  and  he,  therefore,  desires  to  strike  off  three  parts  of  my 
motion,  and  thinks  that  one  quarter  of  his  praise  is  full  enough 
for  any  bishops,  and  this  the  learned  gentleman  calls  an 
amendment. 

Mr.  Bagot  came  next,  and  he  told  us  that  he  had  made  a 
speech  but  a  fortnight  ago,  which  we  did  not  understand,  and 
he  has  now  added  another  which  is  unintelligible  ;  and  so,  be- 
cause he  was  misunderstood  before,  and  cannot  be  compre- 
hended at  present,  he  concludes,  most  logically,  that  the  bish- 
ops are  wrong,  and  that  he  and  Mr.  Hussey  are  right. 

Sir  Edward  Bellew  was  the  next  advocate  of  censure  on  the 
bishops  ;  he  entertained  us  with  a  sad  specimen  of  minor  po- 
lemics, and  drew  a  learned  and  lengthened  distinction  between 
essential  and  non-essential  discipline  ;  and  he  insisted  that  by 
virtue  of  this  distinction,  that  which  was  called  schism  by  the 
CathoHc  prelates,  could  be  changed  into  orthodoxy  by  an  Irish 
baronet.  This  distinction  between  essential  and  non-essential, 
must,  therefore,  be  very  beautiful  and  beautifying.  It  must 
be  very  sublime,  as  it  is  very  senseless,  unless,  indeed,  he 
means  to  tell  us,  that  it  contains  some  secret  allusion  to  our 
enemies.  For  example,  that  the  Duke  of  Richmond  affords 
an  instance  of  the  essential,  whilst  my  Lord  Manners  is  plainly 
non-essential ;  that  Paddy  Duigenan  is  essential  in  perfec- 
iior.,  and  the  foppish  Peel  is,  in  nature,  without  essence  ;  that 


28  SELECT  SPEECHES    OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

Jack  Giffard  is,  surely,  of  the  essential  breed,  whilst  Mr^ 
Willy  Saurin  is  a  dog  of  a  different  color. 

Such,  I  presume,  is  the  plain  Enghsh  of  the  worthy  baron- 
et's dissertation.  Translated  thus,  it  clearly  enough  alludes  to 
the  new  commission ;  but  it  would  be  more  difficult  to  show 
how  it  applied  in  argument  against  my  motion,  I  really  did 
not  expect  so  whimsical  an  opposition  from  the  honorable  bar- 
onet. If  there  be  any  feehng  of  disappointment  about  him  for 
the  rejection  of  the  double  Veto  bill,  he  certainly  ought  not  to 
take  revenge  on  the  Board,  by  bestowing  on  us  all  the  tedious- 
ness  of  incomprehensible  and  insane  theology.  I  altogether 
disclaim  reasoning  with  him,  and  I  freely  consent  that  those 
who  relish  liis  authority  as  a  theologian,  should  vote  against 
the  prelates. 

•  And,  now,  I  address  myself  to  the  learned  brother  of  the 
theological  baronet.  He  began  by  taking  great  merit  to  him- 
self, and  demanding  great  attention  from  you,  because  he  says 
that  he  has  so  rarely  addressed  you.  You  should  yield  to  him, 
he  says,  because  he  so  seldom  requires  your  assent.  It  reminds 
me  of  the  prayer  of  the  English  officer  before  battle.  "  Great 
Lord,"  said  he,  "  during  the  forty  years  I  have  hved,  I  never 
troubled  you  before  with  a  single  prayer.  I  have,  therefore,  a 
right,  that  you  should  grant  me  one  request,  and  do  just  as  I 
desire,  for  this  once."  Such  was  the  manner  in  which  the 
learned  gentleman  addressed  us  ;  ho  begs  you  will  confide  in 
his  zeal  for  your  interests,  because  he  has  hitherto  confined 
that  zeal  to  his  own.  He  desires  that  you  will  rely  upon 
his  attention  to  your  affairs  because  he  has  been  heretofore  inat- 
tentive to  them ;  and  that  you  may  depend  on  his  anxiety 
for  Catholic  Emancipation,  inasmuch  as  he  has  abstained  from 
taking  any  step  to  attain  that  measure.       , 

Quite  different  are  my  humble  claims  on  your  notice — quite 
different  are  the  demands  I  make  on  your  confidence.  I  hum- 
bly sohcit  it  because  I  have  sacrificed,  and  do,  and  ever  wiU 
sacrifice,  my  interest  to  yours — because  I  have  attended  to  the 
varying  posture  of  your  affairs,  and  sought  for  Catholic  Eman- 
cipation with  an  activity  and  energy  proportioned  to  the  great 
object  of  our  pursuit.  I  do,  therefore,  entreat  your  attention, 
whilst  I  unravel  the  spider-web  of  sophistry  with  which  the 


EEPLY  TO   ME.   BELLEW.  29 

ieamed  gentleman  lias  this  day  sought  to  embarrass  and  dis- 
figure your  cause. 

His  discourse  was  divided  into  three  principal  heads.  First, 
he  charged  the  CathoUc  prelates  with  indiscretion.  Secondly, 
he  charged  them  with  error.  And  lastly,  he  charged  the  Cath- 
olics with  bigotry ;  and  with  the  zeal  and  anxiety  of  an  hired 
advocate,  he  gratuitously  vindicated  the  intolerance  of  our  op- 
pressors. I  beg  your  patience,  whilst  I  follow  the  learned 
gentleman  through  this  threefold  arrangement  of  his  subject. 
I  shall,  however,  invert  the  order  of  his  arrangement,  and  be- 
gin with  his  third  topic. 

His  argument,  in  support  of  the  intolerants,  runs  thus. 
First,  he  alleges  that  the  Cathohcs  are  attached  to  their 
reHgion  with  a  bigoted  zeal.  I  admit  the  zeal  but  I  utterly 
deny  the  bigotry.  He  seems  to  think  I  overcharge  his  state- 
ment ;  perhaps  I  do  ;  but  I  feel  confident  that,  in  substance, 
this  accusation  amounted  to  a  direct  charge  of  bigotry. 
Well,  ha^ing  charged  the  Catholics  with  a  bigoted  attach- 
ment to  theu'  church,  and  having  truly  stated  our  repug- 
nance to  any  interference  on  the  part  of  the  secretaries  of 
the  Castle  with  our  prelates,  he  proceeded  to  insist  that  those 
feelings  on  our  part  justified  the  apprehensions  of  the  Pro- 
testants. The  Cathohcs,  said  Mr.  Belle w,  are  alarmed  for 
their  church ;  why  should  not  the  Protestants  be  alarmed  also 
for  theirs  ?  The  Catholic,  said  he,  desires  safety  for  his  reli- 
gion ;  why  should  not  the  Protestant  require  security  for  his  ? 
When  you.  Catholics,  express  your  anxiety  for  the  purity  of 
your  faith  (adds  the  learned  advocate),  you  demonstrate  the 
necessity  there  is  for  the  Protestant  to  be  vigilant  for  the  pre- 
servation of  his  behef ;  and  hence,  Mr.  Bellew  concludes,  that 
it  is  quite  natural,  and  quite  justifiable  in  the  Liverpools  and 
Eldons  of  the  Cabinet,  to  invent  and  insist  upon  guards  and 
secm'ities,  vetoes,  and  double  vetoes,  boards  of  control,  and 
commissions  for  loyalty. 

Before  I  reply  to  this  attack  upon  us,  and  vindication  of  our 
enemies,  let  me  observe,  that,  however  groundless  the 
learned  gentleman  may  be  in  argument,  his  friends  at  the 
Castle  will,  at  least,  have  the  benefit  of  boasting,  that  such 
assertions  have  been  made  by  a  Cathohc,  at  the  CathoUc  Board. 


30  SELECT   SPEECHES   OF  DANIEL    O'CONNELL. 

And,  now,  see  how  futile  and  unfounded  his  reasoning  is ; 
lie  says,  that  our  disHke  to  the  proposed  commission  justifies 
the  suspicion  in  which  the  plan  of  such  commission  originated  ; 
that  our  anxiety  for  the  preservation  of  our  church  vindicates 
those  who  deem  the  proposed  arrangement  necessary  for  the 
protection  of  theirs — a  mode  of  reasoning  perfectly  true,  and 
perfectly  appUcable,  if  we  sought  any  interference  with,  or 
control  over,  the  Protestant  Church.  If  we  deshed  to  form 
any  board  or  commission  to  control  or  to  regulate  the  appoint- 
ment of  their  bishops,  deans,  archdeacons,  rectors,  or  curates  ; 
if  we  asked  or  required  that  a  single  Catholic  should  be  con- 
sulted upon  the  management  of  the  Protestant  Church,  or  of 
its  revenues  or  privileges ;  then,  indeed,  would  the  learned 
gentleman  be  right  in  his  argument,  and  then  would  he  have, 
by  our  example,  \dndicated  our  enemies. 

But  the  fact  does  not  bear  him  out ;  for  we  do  not  seek, 
nor  desire,  nor  would  we  accept  of,  any  kind  of  interference 
with  the  Protestant  Church.  We  disclaim  and  disavow  any 
kind  of  control  over  it.  We  ask  not,  nor  would  we  allow, 
any  Catholic  authority  over  the  mode  of  appointment  of  their 
clergy.  Nay,  we  are  quite  content  to  be  excluded  for  ever 
from  even  advising  his  Majesty,  with  respect  to  any  matter 
relating  to  or  concerning  the  Protestant  Church — its  rights,  its 
properties,  or  its  privileges.  I  will,  for  my  own  part,  go  much 
further ;  and  I  do  declare,  most  solemnly,  that  I  would  feel 
and  express  equal,  if  not  stronger  repugnance  to  the  inter- 
ference of  a  CathoUc  with  the  Protestant  Church,  than  that  I 
have  expressed  and  do  feel  to  any  Protestant  interference  with 
ours.  In  opposing  their  interference  with  us,  I  content  my- 
self with  the  mere  war  of  words.  But  if  the  case  were  re- 
versed— if  the  Catholic  sought  this  control  over  the  reHgiou 
of  the  Protestant,  the  Protestant  should  command  my  heart, 
my  tongue,  my  arm,  in  opposition  to  so  unjust  and  insulting  a 
measure.  So  help  me  God !  I  would  in  that  case  not  only 
feel  for  the  Protestant  and  speak  for  him,  but  I  Avould  fight 
for  him,  and  cheerfully  sacrifice  my  life  in  defence  of  the  great 
principle  for  which  I  have  ever  contended — the  principle  oi 
universal  and  complete  religious  liberty. 

Then,  can  any  tiling  be  more  absurd  and  untenable  than  tL.3 


REPLY    TO   MR.   BELLEW.  33 

argument  of  the  learned  gentleman,  wlien  you  see  it  stripped 
of  the  false  coloring  he  has  given  it  ?  It  is  absiu'd  to  say, 
that  merely  because  the  CathoUc  desires  to  keep  his  jehgion 
free,  the  Protestant  is  thereby  justified  in  seeking  to  enslave  it. 
Beverse  the  position  and  see  whether  the  learned  gentleman 
will  adopt  or  enforce  it.  The  Protestant  desires  to  preserve 
his  religion  fi-ee ;  would  that  justify  the  Cathohc  in  any  at- 
tempt to  enslave  it  ?  I  will  take  the  learned  advocate  of  in- 
tolerance to  the  bigoted  court  of  Spain  or  Portugal,  and  ask 
him,  would  he,  in  the  supposed  case,  insist  that  the  Catholic 
was  justifiable.  No,  my  lord,  he  will  not  ventui-e  to  assert 
that  the  Catholic  would  be  so  ;  and  I  boldly  tell  him  that  in 
such  a  case,  the  Protestant  would  be  unquestionably  right, 
the  Catholic,  certainly,  an  insolent  bigot. 

But  the  learned  gentleman  has  invited  me  to  a  discussion  of 
the  question  of  securities,  and  I  cheerfully  follow  him.  And  I 
do,  my  lord,  assert,  that  the  Catholic  is  warranted  in  the  most 
scrupulous  and  timid  jealousy  of  any  EngUsh,  for  I  will  not  call 
it  Protestant,  (for  it  is  pohtical,  and  not,  in  truth,  religious)  in- 
terference with  his  church.  And  I  will  also  assert,  and  am 
ready  to  prove,  that  the  Enghsh  have  no  solid  or  rational  pre- 
text for  requking  any  of  those  guards,  absurdly  called  securi- 
ties, over  us  or  our  religion. 

My  lord,  the  Irish  Catholics  never,  never  broke  theu'  faith 
— they  never  violated  their  pHghted  promise  to  the  EngHsh.  I 
appeal  to  history  for  the  truth  of  my  assertion.  My  lord,  the 
English  never,  never  observed  then*  faith  with  us,  they  never 
performed  their  pHghted  promise  ;  the  history  of  the  last  six 
hundred  years  proves  the  accuracy  of  my  assertion.  I  will 
leave  the  older  periods,  and  fix  myself  at  the  Revolution.  More 
than  one  hundred  and  twenty  years  have  elapsed  since  the 
treaty  of  Limerick ;  that  treaty  has  been  honorably  and 
faithfully  performed  by  the  Irish  Catholics ;  it  has  been 
foully,  disgracefully,  and  directly  violated  by  the  Enghsh. 
English  oaths  and  solemn  engagements  bound  them  to 
its  performance ;  it  remains  still  of  force  and  unperformed ; 
and  the  ruffian  yell  of  English  treachery  wliich  accompanied 
its  first  violation,  has,  it  seems,  been  repeated  even  in  the  sen- 
ate house  at  the  last  repetition   of  the   violation   of  that 


32  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

treaty.  They  rejoiced  and  they  shouted  at  the  perjuries  of 
their  ancestors — at  their=own  want  of  good  faith  or  common 
sense. 

Nay,  are  there  not  present  men  who  can  tell  us,  of  their  own 
knowledge,  of  another  instance  of  English  treachery?  Was 
not  the  assent  of  many  of  the  Cathohcs  to  the  fatal — oh  !  the 
fatal  measure  of  the  Union — purchased  by  the  express  and 
written  promise  of  CathoHc  Emancipation,  made  from  author- 
ity by  Lord  CornwaUis,  and  confirmed  by  the  prime  minister, 
Mr.  Pitt?  And  has  that  promise  been  performed?  or  has 
Irish  creduhty  afforded  only  another  instance  of  English  faith- 
lessness? Now,  my  lord,  I  ask  this  assembly  whether  they 
can  confide  in  English  promises  ?  I  say  nothing  of  the  solemn 
pledges  of  individuals.  Can  you  confide  in  the  more  than 
punic  faith  of  your  hereditary  task-masters?  or  shall  we  be 
accused  of  our  scrupulous  jealousy,  when  we  reject  with 
indignation,  the  contamination  of  EngHsh  control  over  our 
church  ? 

[^But,  said  the  learned  advocate  (Mr.  Bellew),  they  have  a 
right  to  .demand,  because  they  stand  in  need  of  securities.  I 
deny  the  right — I  deny  the  need.  There  is  not  any  such  right 
— there  exists  no  such  necessity.  What  security  have  they 
had  for  the  century  that  has  elapsed  since  the  violation  of  the 
treaty  of  Limerick  ?  What  security  have  they  had  during  these 
years  of  oppression  and  barbarous  and  bloody  legislation? 
What  security  have  they  had  whilst  the  hereditary  claim  of 
the  house  of  Stuart  remained  ?  And  surely,  all  the  right  that 
hereditary  descent  could  give  was  vested  in  that  family.  Let 
me  not  be  misunderstood,  I  admit  they  had  no  right ;  I  ad- 
mit that  their  right  was  taken  away  by  the  people.  I  freely 
admit  that,  on  the  contrary,  the  people  have  the  clear  right 
to  cashier  base  and  profligate  ^mnces.  What  secmity  had 
the  English  from  our  bishops  when  England  was  invaded, 
and  the  unfortunate  but  gallant  Prince  Charles  advanced 
into  the  heart  of  England,  guided  by  valor,  and  accompa- 
nied by  a  handful  of  brave  men,  who  had,  under  his  com- 
mand, obtained  more  than  one  victory  ?  He  was  a  man  likely 
to  excite  and  gratify  L"ish  enthusiasm ;  he  was  chivalrous  and 
brave ;  he  was  a  man  of  honor,  and  a  gentleman  ;  no  violator 


REPLY  TO   MR.   BELLEW.  33 

of  liis  word;  lie  speut  not  liis  time  in  making  liis  soldiers  ridic- 
ulous with  horse-tails  and  white  feathers ;  he  did  not  consume 
his  mornings  in  tasting  curious  drams,  and  evenings  in  gallant- 
ing old  women.  What  security  had  the  Enghsh  then  ?  Wha.t 
security  had  they  against  our  bishops  or  our  laity,  when  Amer- 
ica nobly  flung  off  the  yoke  that  had  become  too  heavy  to  be 
borne,  and  sought  her  independence  at  the  risk  of  her  being  ? 
What  security  had  they  then  ?  I  will  tell  you,  my  lord.  Their 
security  at  all  those  periods  was  perfect  and  complete,  because 
it  existed  in  the  conscientious  allegiance  of  the  Catholics ;  it 
consisted  in  the  duty  of  allegiance  which  the  Irish  Cathohcs 
have  ever  held,  and  will,  I  trust,  ever  hold  sacred  ;  it  consisted 
in  the  conscientious  submission  to  legitimate  authority,  however 
oppressive,  which  our  bishops  have  always  preached,  and  our 
laity  have  always  practisedj 

And  now,  my  lord,  they  have  the  additional  security  of  our 
oaths,  of  our  ever  unviolated  oaths  of  allegiance  ;  and  if  they 
had  emancipated  us,  they  would  have  had  the  additional  secu- 
rity of  our  gratitude  and  of  our  personal  and  immediate  inter- 
ests. We  have  gone  through  persecution  and  sorrow  ;  we 
have  experienced  oppression  and  afiliction,  and  yet  we  have 
continued  faithful.  How  absurd  to  think  that  additional  secu- 
rity conld  be  necessary  to  guard  against  concihation  and  kind- 
ness! 

But  it  is  not  bigotry  that  requires  those  concessions  ;  they 
were  not  invented  by  mere  intolerance.  The  Enghsh  do  not 
dislike  us  as  Catholics — they  simply  hate  us  as  Irish  ;  they  ex- 
haust their  blood  and  treasure  for  the  Papists  of  Spain  ;  they 
have  long  observed  and  cherished  a  close  and  affectionate  alli- 
ance with  the  ignorant  and  bigoted  Papists  of  Portugal ;  and 
now  they  exert  every  sinew  to  preserve  those  Papists  from  the 
horrors  of  a  foreign  yoke.  They  emancipated  the  French  Pa- 
pists in  Canada,  and  a  German  Papist  is  allowed  to  rise  to  the 
first  rank  in  his  profession — the  army  ;  he  can  command  not 
only  Irish  but  even  English  Protestants.  Let  us,  therefore,  be 
just  ;  there  is  no  such  horror  of  Popery  in  England  as  is  sup- 
posed ;  they  have  a  great  dislike  to  Irish  Papists  ;  but  separate 
the  quahties — put  the  filthy  whiskers  and  foreign  visage  of  a 
German  on  the  animal,  and  the  Papist  is  entitled  to  high  favor 


34  SELECT   SPEECHES   OF  DANIEL   o'CONNELL. 

from  the  just  and  discriminating  English.  We  fight  their  bat- 
tles ;  we  beat  their  enemies ;  we  pay  their  taxes,  and  we  are 
degraded,  oppressed  and  insulted,  whilst  the  Spanish,  the 
Portuguese,  the  French,  and  the  German  Papists  are  courted, 
cherished  and  promoted. 

I  revert  now  to  the  learned  gentleman's  accusation  of  the 
bishops.  He  has  accused  them  of  error  in  doctrine  and  of 
indiscretion  in  practice.  He  tells  us  that  he  is  counsel  to  the 
college  of  Maynooth,  and,  in  that  capacity,  he  seems  to  arro- 
gate to  himself  much  theological  and  legal  knowledge.  I  con- 
cede the  law,  but  I  deny  the  divinity ;  neither  can  I  admit  the 
accuracy  of  the  eulogium  which  he  has  pronounced  on  that 
institution,  with  its  mongrel  board  of  control — half  Papist  and 
half  Protestant.  I  was  indeed  at  a  loss  to  account  for  the 
strange  want  of  talent — for  the  silence  of  Irish  genius  which 
has  been  remarked  within  the  college.  I  now  see  it  easily  ex- 
plained. The  incubus  of  jealous  and  rival  intolerance  sits 
upon  its  walls,  and  genius,  and  taste,  and  talent  fly  from  the 
sad  dormitory,  where  sleeps  the  spirit  of  dullness.  I  have  heard, 
indeed,  of  their  Crawleys  and  their  converts,  but  where  or 
when,  will  that  college  produce  a  Magee  or  a  Sandes,  a  M'Don- 
nell  or  a  Grifiin  ?  When  will  the  warm  heart  of  Irish  genius 
exhibit  in  Maynooth  such  bright  examples  of  worth  and  talent 
as  those  men  disclose  ?  Is  it  true,  that  the  bigot  may  rule  in 
Trinity  College  ;  the  highest  station  in  it  may  be  the  reward 
of  writing  an  extremely  bigoted  and  more  foohsh  pamphlet ; 
but  still  there  is  no  conflicting  principle  of  hostile  jealousy  in 
its  rulers ;  and  therefore  Irish  genius  does  not  slumber  there, 
nor  is  it  smothered  as  at  Maynooth. 

The  accusation  of  error  brought  against  the  bishops  by  the 
learned  gentleman,  is  sustained  simply  upon  his  opinion  and 
authority.  The  matter  stands  thus  : — at  the  one  side,  we  have 
the  most  Eev.  and  right  Rev.  the  Catholic  prelates  of  Ireland, 
who  assert  that  there  is  schism  in  the  proposed  arrangement ; 
on  the  other  side,  we  have  the  very  Rev.  the  counsel  for 
the  college  of  Maynooth,  who  asserts  that  there  is  no  schism 
in  that  arrangement.  These  are  the  conflicting  authorities. 
The  Rev.  prelates  assert  the  one ;  he,  the  counsellor,  asserts 
the  other ;  and,  as  we  have  not  leisure  to  examine  the  point 


REPLY  TO   MR.   BELLEW.  35 

here  doctriiially,  we  are  reduced  to  the  sad  dilemma  of 
choosing  between  the  prelates  and  the  lawyer.  There  may 
be  a  want  of  taste  in  the  choice  which  I  make,  but  I 
confess  I  cannot  but  prefer  the  bishops.  I  shall,  there- 
fore, say  with  them,  there  would  be  schism  in  the  arrange- 
ment, and  deny  the  assertion  of  the  Rev.  counsel,  that  it 
would  not  be  schism.  But  suppose  his  reverence,  the  coun- 
sel for  Maynooth,  was  right,  and  the  bishops  wrong,  and  that 
in  the  new  arrangement  there  would  be  no  schism,  I  then  say, 
there  would  be  worse ;  there  would  be  corruption,  and  profli- 
gacy, and  subserviency  to  the  Castle  in  it,  and  its  degrading 
effects  would  soon  extend  themselves  to  every  rank  and  class 
of  the  CathoHcs. 

I  now  come  to  the  second  charge  which  the  learned  gentle- 
man, in  his  capacity  of  counsel  to  the  college  of  Maynooth, 
has  brought  against  the  bishops.  It  consists  of  the  high 
crime  of  "indiscretion."  They  were  indiscreet,  said  he,  in 
coming  forward  so  soon  and  so  boldly.  What,  when  they 
found  that  a  plan  had  been  formed  which  they  knew  to  be 
schismatic  and  degrading — when  they  found  that  this  plan 
was  matured,  and  printed,  and  brought  into  parhament, 
and  embodied  in  a  bill,  and  read  twice  in  the  House  of 
Commons,  without  any  consultation  with,  and,  as  it  were,  in 
contempt  of  the  CathoHcs  of  Ireland — shall  it  be  said,  that  it 
was  either  premature  or  indiscreet,  solemnly  and  loudly  to 
protest  against  such  plan!  If  it  were  indiscreet,  it  was  an 
indiscretion  which  I  love  and  admire — a  necessary  indiscre- 
tion, unless,  perhaps,  the  learned  counsel  for  Maynooth,  may 
imagine  that  the  proper  time  would  not  arrive  for  this  protest 
until  the  bill  had  actually  passed,  and  all  protest  should  be 
unavaihng. 

No,  my  lord,  I  cannot  admire  this  thing  called  Catholic 
discretion,  which  would  manage  our  affairs  in  secret,  and  de- 
clare our  opinions,  when  it  was  too  late  to  give  them  any 
importance.  Catholic  discretion  may  be  of  value  at  the  Cas- 
tle ;  a  Cathohc  secret  may  be  carried,  to  be  discounted  there 
for  prompt  payment.  The  learned  gentleman  may  also  tell  us 
the  price  that  Cathohc  discretion  bears  at  the  Castle, 
whether  it  be  worth  a  place,  a  peerage,  or  a  pension.     But, 


36  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

if  it  have  value  and  a  price  for  individuals,  it  is  of  no 
worth  to  the  Catholic  people.  I  reject  and  abjure  it  as 
appUcable  to  pubhc  officers.  Our  opinions  ought  to  be 
formed  deliberately,  but  they  should  be  announced  manfully 
and  distinctly.  "We  should  be  despicable,  and  deserve  to  con- 
tinue in  slavery,  if  we  could  equivocate  or  disguise  our  senti- 
ments on  those  subjects  of  vital  importance  ;  and  I  call  upon 
you  to  thank  the  CathoKc  prelates,  precisely  because  they  had 
not  the  learned  gentleman's  quahty  of  discretion,  and  that 
they  had  the  real  and  genuine  discretion,  which  made  them 
pubhsh  resolutions  consistent  with  their  exalted  rank  and  rev- 
erend character,  and  most  consonant  to  the  wishes  and  views 
of  the  Catholic  people  of  Ireland. 

I  now  draw  to  a  close,  and  I  conjure  you  not  to  come  to  any 
division.  Let  the  amendment  be  withdrawn  by  my  learned 
friend,  and  let  our  approbation  of  our  amiable  and  excellent, 
our  dignified  and  independent  prelates,  be,  as  it  ought  to  be, 
unanimous.  We  want  unanimity  ;  we  require  to  combine  in 
the  constitutional  pursuit  of  Catholic  Emancipation  every 
class  and  rank  of  the  Catholics — the  prelate  and  the  peer,  the 
country  gentleman  and  the  farmer,  the  peasant  and  his  priest  ; 
our  career  is  to  begin  again  ;  let  our  watchword  be  unanimity, 
and  our  object  be  plain  and  undisguised,  as  it  has  been, 
namely,  simple  Eepeal.  Let  us  not  involve  or  embarrass  our- 
selves with  vetoes,  and  arrangements,  and  securities,  and 
guards,  and  pretexts  of  divisions,  and  all  the  implements  for 
ministerial  corruption,  and  Castle  dominion ;  let  our  cry  be 
simple  Repeal. 

It  is  well — it  is  very  well  that  the  late  bill  has  been  rejected. 
I  rejoice  that  it  has  been  scouted.  Our  sapient  friends  at 
Cork  called  it  a  "  Charter  of  Emancipation."  You,  my  lord, 
called  it  so  ;  but,  with  much  respect,  you  and  they  are  greatly 
mistaken.  In  truth,  it  was  no  charter  at  all,  nor  hke  a  char- 
ter ;  and  it  would  not  have  emancipated.  This  charter  of 
emancipation  was  no  charter ;  and  would  give  no  emancipa- 
tion. As  a  plain,  prose-like  expression,  it  ,was  unsujDported  ; 
and,  as  a  figure  and  fiction,  it  made  very  bad  poetry.  No,  my 
lord,  the  bill  would  have  insulted  your  religion,  and  done 
almost  nothing  for  your  liberties  ;  it  would  have  done  nothing 


KEPLY   TO   MR.    BELLEW.  37 

at  all  for  the  people — it  would  send  a  few  of  our  discreet  Ca- 
thoKcs,  with  their  Castle-discretion,  into  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, but  it  would  not  have  enabled  Catholic  peers  in  Ireland 
to  vote  for  the  representative  peers;  and  thus  the  blunder 
arose,  because  those  friends,  who,  I  am  told,  took  so  much 
trouble  for  jou,  examined  the  act  of  Union  only,  and  did  not 
take  the  trouble  of  examining  the  act  regulating  the  mode  of 
voting  for  the  representative  peers. 

The  bill  would  have  done  nothing  for  the  Catholic  bar,  save 
the  paltry  dignity  of  silk  gowns  ;  and  it  would  have  actually 
deprived  that  bar  of  the  places  of  assistant-barrister,  which  as 
the  law  stands,  they  may  enjoy.  It  would  have  done  nothing 
in  corporations — Uterally  nothing  at  all ;  and  when  I  pressed 
this  on  Mr.  Plunket,  and  pointed  out  to  him  the  obstacles  to 
corporate  rights,  in  a  conference  with  which,  since  his  return 
to  Ireland,  he  honored  me,  he  informed  me — and  informed  me 
of  course  truly — that  the  reason  why  the  corporations  could 
not  be  further  opened,  or  even  the  Bank  of  Ireland  mentioned, 
was,  because  the  EngHsh  would  not  listen  to  any  violation  of 
chartered  rights  ;  and  this  bill,  my  lord — this  inefficient,  use- 
less, and  insulting  bill — must  be  dignified  with  the  appellation 
of  a  "  Charter  of  Emancipation."  I  do  most  respectfully  en- 
treat, my  lord,  that  the  expression  may  be  weU  considered  be- 
fore it  is  used  again. 

And  now  let  me  entreat,  let  me  conjure  the  meetuig  to  ban- 
ish every  angry  emotion,  every  sensation  of  rivalship  or  oppo- 
sition ;  let  us  recollect  that  we  owe  this  vote  to  the  unim- 
peached  character  of  our  worthy  prelates.  Even  our  enemies 
respect  them  ;  and,  in  the  fury  of  religious  and  poHtical  cal- 
umny, the  breath  even  of  hostile  and  polemical  slander  has 
not  reached  them.  Shall  Cathohcs,  then,  be  found  to  express 
or  even  to  imply  censure  ? 

Kecollect,  too,  that  your  country  requires  your  unanimous 
support.  Poor,  degraded,  and  fallen  Ireland  !  has  you,  and,  I 
may  almost  say,  you  alone  to  cheer  and  sustain  her.  Her 
friends  have  been  lukewarm  and  faint  hearted ;  her  enemies 
are  vigilant,  active,  yelling,  and  insulting.  In  the  name  of 
your  country,  I  call  on  you  not  to  divide,  but  to  consecrate 
your  unanimous  efforts  to  her  support,  tiU  bigotry  shall  be 
put  to   flight,  and  oppression  banished  this  land  for  ever. 


38  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 


SPEECH  IN  1813  ON  EEQUIEING  SECUEITIES  EBOM 
THE  CATHOLICS. 


Having  come  here  determined  to  address  this  meeting,  I 
avail  myself  of  this  opportunity  to  soHcit  your  patience  and 
attention.  Let  me,  in  the  first  place,  congratulate  you  on  the 
progress  which  the  principle  of  rehgious  liberty  has  made 
since  you  last  met.  It  has  been  greatly  advanced  by  a  mag- 
nificent discovery  lately  made  by  the  Enghsli  in  ethics,  and 
upon  which  I  also  beg  leave  to  congratulate  you.  It  is  this  : 
Several  sagacious  Enghshmen  have  discovered,  in  the  nine- 
teenth century,  and  more  than  four  hundred  years  after  the 
propagation  of  science  was  facihtated  by  the  art  of  printing — 
several  sagacious  Enghshmen  have  made  this  wonderful  dis- 
covery in  moral  philosophy,  that  a  man  is  not  necessarily  a 
worse  citizen  for  having  a  conscience,  and  that  a  conscien- 
tious adherence  to  a  Christian  rehgion  is  not  an  offence  deserv- 
ing of  degradation  or  punishment. 

The  operation,  however,  of  this  discovery  had  its  oppo- 
nents ;  hke  gravitation  and  the  cow-pock,  it  has  been  opposed, 
and,  for  the  present,  opposed  with  success ;  but  the  principle 
has  not  been  resisted.  Yes,  our  enemies  themselves  have 
been  forced  to  concede  our  right  to  emancipation.  Duigenan, 
and  Nichol,  and  Scott  are  laughed  at — not  Hstened  to  ;  the 
principle  is  admitted — the  right  of  hberty  of  conscience  is  not 
controverted — ^your  emancipation  is  certain — it  is  now  only  a 
question  of  terms — it  only  remains  to  be  seen  whether  we  shall 
be  emancipated  upon  their  terms  or  upon  ours. 

They  offer  you  emancipation,  as  Cathohcs,  if  you  will  kindly 
consent,  in  return,  to  become  schismatics.  They  offer  you  lib- 
erty, as  men,  if  you  agree  to  become  slaves  after  a  new  fash- 
ion— that  is,  your  friends  and  your  enemies  have  declared  that 
you  are  entitled  to  Catholic  emancipation  and  freedom,  upon 
the  trifling  terms  of  schism  and  servitude  ! 

Generous  enemies  ! — bountiful  friends !  Yes,  in  their  bounty 
they  resemble  the   debtor  who   should  address  his  creditor 


ON   REQUIRING   SECURITIES   FROM  THE   CATHOLICS.  39 

thus  : — "  It  is  time,  I  owe  you  <£100  ;  I  am  perfectly  well  able 
to  pay  you ;  but  what  will  you  give  me  if  I  hand  you  6s.  8d. 
in  the  poimd  of  your  just  debt,  as  a  final  adjustment  ?" 
"  Let  us  allay  all  jealousies,"  continues  the  debtor — let 
us  put  an  end  to  all  animosities — I  will  give  you  one-third 
of  what  I  owe  you,  if  you  will  give  me  forty  shillings  in  the 
pound  of  additional  value,  and  a  receipt  in  full,  duly  stamped 
into  the  bargain." 

But  why  do  I  treat  this  serious  and  melancholy  subject 
with  levity  ?  Why  do  I  jest  when  my  heart  is  sore  and  sad  ? 
Because  I  have  not  patience  at  this  modern  cant  of  securities, 
and  vetoes,  and  arrangements,  and  clauses,  and  commissions. 
Securities  against  what  ?  Not  against  the  irritation  and  dis- 
hke  which  may  and  naturally  ought  to  result  from  prolonged 
oppression  and  insult.  Securities — not  against  the  conse- 
quences of  dissensions,  distrusts,  and  animosities.  Securities 
— not  against  foreign  adversaries.  The  securities  that  are  re- 
quired from  us  are  against  the  effects  of  conciliation  and  kind- 
ness— against  the  dangers  to  be  apprehended  fropi  domestic 
union,  peace,  and  cordiality.  If  they  do  not  emancipate  us — 
if  they  leave  us  aliens  and  outlaws  in  our  native  land — ^if  they 
continue  our  degradation,  and  all  those  grievances  that,  at 
present,  set  our  passions  at  war  with  our  duty ;  then,  they 
have  no  pretext  for  asking,  nor  do  they  require  any  securities  ; 
but  should  they  raise  us  to  the  rank  of  Irishmen — should  they 
give  us  an  immediate  and  personal  interest  in  our  native  land 
— should  they  share  with  us  the  blessings  of  the  constitution 
— should  they  add  to  our  duty  the  full  tide  of  our  interests  and 
affection  ;  then — then,  say  they,  securities  will  be  necessary. 
Securities  and  guards  must  be  adopted.  State  bridles  must 
be  invented,  and  shackles  and  manacles  must  be  forged,  lest, 
in  the  intoxication  of  new  Uberty,  we  should  destroy,  only  be- 
cause we  have  a  greater  interest  to  preserve. 

And  do  they — do  these  security-men  deserve  to  be  reasoned 
Tvdth  ?  I  readily  admit — I  readily  proclaim  Grattan's  purity — 
his  integrity — his  patriotism  ;  but,  in  his  eagerness  to  obtain 
for  us  that  hberty,  for  which  he  has  so  long  and  so  zealously 
contended,  he  has  overlooked  the  absurdity  which  those  men 
fall  into,  who  demand  securities  against  the  consequences  of 


40  SELECT   SPEECHES   OP   DANIEL   O'CONNELL. 

emancipation,  whilst  tliey  look  for  no  securities  against  tlie 
effects  of  injustice  and  contumely. 

Grattan  has  also  overlooked  the  insult  to  our  understand- 
ings and  to  our  moral  feehngs  which  this  demand  for  securities 
inflicts.  Grattan  is  mistaken  up  on  this  topic ;  but  he  is  the 
only  man  who  is  merely  mistaken.  The  cry  for  securities  has 
been  raised,  merely  to  retard  the  progress  of  emancipation. 
Canning  affects  to  be  our  friend,  because,  since  his  conduct  to 
his  colleague.  Viscount  Castlereagh,  he  has  found  it  difficult  to 
obtain  a  niche  in  any  administration.  God  preserve  us  from 
the  friendship  of  Mr.  Canning !  I  have  no  apprehension  of 
Mr.  Canning's  enmity  :  he  was  our  avowed  enemy  ;  that  is,  he 
always  voted  against  us,  from  the  moment  he  got  pension  or 
place  under  Pitt,  to  the  time  when  he  was  dismissed  from  office, 
and  rendered  hopeless  of  regaining  it.  And,  as  for  Lord  Cas- 
tlereagh, rely  on  it,  that,  though  he  may  consent  to  change  one 
kind  of  degradation  for  another,  he  never  will  consent  to  your 
attaining  your  freedom :  and  was  it  to  obtain  the  vote  of 
Lord  Castlereagh  that  Grattan  gave  up  our  honor  and  our  re- 
Hgion  ?  Does  Grattan  forget — does  he  forgive  the  artificer  of 
the  Union,  or  the  means  by  which  it  was  achieved  ?  Does  not 
Grattan  know  that  Lord  Castlereagh  first  dyed  his  country  in 
blood,  and  then  sold  her. 

But,  I  repeat  it,  I  have  not  patience,  common  patience  with 
those  men  who  cry  out  for  securities,  and  will  not  see  that  they 
would  obtain  real  security  from  the  generous  concession  of 
plain  right — from  conciliation  and  kindness  ;  aU  reasoning,  all 
experience  proves  that  justice  to  the  Catholics  ought  to  be, 
and  has  been,  in  the  moments  of  distress  and  peril,  the  first 
and  best  security  to  the  state.  I  will  not  stoop  to  argue  the 
theory  with  any  man.  I  will  not  condescend  to  enter  into  an 
abstract  reasoning  to  prove  that  safety  to  a  government  ought 
to  result  from  justice  and  kindness  to  the  people,  but  I  will 
point  out  the  evidence  of  facts"  which  demonstrate,  that  con- 
cession to  L*ish  Catholics  has  in  itself  been  resorted  to,  and 
produced  security  to  our  government — that  they  have  consid- 
ered and  found  it  to  be  a  security  in  itself — a  safeguard  against 
the  greatest  evils  and  calamities,  and  not  a  cause  of  danger  or 
apprehension. 


ON   EEQJJIIIING   SECURITIES  FKOM  THE   CATHOLICS.  41 

Ireland,  in  the  connection  with  England,  has  but  too  con- 
stantly shared  the  fate  of  the  prodigal's  dog — I  mean  no  per- 
sonal allusion — she  has  been  kicked  in  the  insolence  of  pros- 
perity, and  she  has  borne  all  the  famine  and  distress  of  ad- 
versity. Ireland  has  done  more — she  has  afforded  an  abun- 
dant source  of  safety  and  security  to  England  in  the  midst 
of  every  adversity ;  and  at  the  hour  of  her  calamity,  Eng- 
land has  had  only  to  turn  to  Ireland  with  the  offer  of  friend- 
ship and  cordiahty,  and  she  has  been  rewarded  by  our  cordial 
and  unremitting  succor. 

Trace  the  history  of  the  penal  laws  in  their  leading  fea- 
tures, and  you  will  see  the  truth  of  my  assertion.  '  The  capitu- 
lation of  Limerick  was  signed  on  the  3rd  October,  1691.  Our 
ancestors,  by  that  treaty,  stipulated  for,  and  were  promised 
the  perfect  freedom  of  their  rehgion,  and  that  no  other  oath 
should  be  imposed  on  Cathohcs,  save  the  oath  of  allegiance. 
The  Irish  performed  the  entire  of  that  treaty  on  their  part : 
it  remains  unperformed,  as  it  certainly  is  of  force,  in  point  of 
justice,  to  this  hour,  on  the  part  of  the  English.  Even  in  the 
reign  of  William,  it  was  violated  by  that  prince,  whose  gener- 
als and  judges  signed  that  treaty — by  that  prince  who  himself 
confirmed  and  enrolled  it. 

But  he  was  the  same  prince  that  signed  the  order  for  the 
horrible,  cold-blooded  assassination  and  massacre  of  the  un- 
fortunate Macdonalds  of  Glencoe ;  and  if  his  violation  of  the 
Limerick  treaty  was  confined  to  some  of  the  articles,  it  was 
only  because  the  alteration  in  the  succession,  and  the  ex- 
treme pressure  of  foreign  affairs,  did  not  render  it  prudent  nor 
convenient  to  offer  further  injury  and  injustice  to  the  Irish 
Catholics. 

But  the  case  was  altered  in  the  next  reign.  The  power  and 
the  glory,  which  England  acquired  by  her  achievements,  under 
Marlborough — the  internal  strength,  arising  from  the  posses- 
sion of  hberty,  enabled  her  to  treat  Ireland  at  her  caprice,  and 
she  accordingly  poured  the  full  vial  of  her  hatred  upon  the  un- 
fortunate Cathohcs  of  Ireland.  England  was  strong  and 
proud,  and,  therefore,  unjust.  The  treaty  of  Limerick  Avas 
trampled  under  foot — ^justice,  and  humanity,  and  conscience 
were  trodden  to  the  earth,  and  a   code  of  laws   inflicted  on 


42  SELECT  SPEECHES  OP  DANIEL    O'CONNELL. 

the  Irish.  Cathohcs,  which  Montesquieu  has  well  said,  ought 
to  have  been  written  in  blood,  and  of  which  you  still  feel  the 
emaciating  cruelty — a  code  of  laws  which  still  leave  you  ahens 
in  the  land  of  your  ancestors.  Aliens! — did  I  say?  Alas! 
you  have  not  the  privileges  of  alienage  ;  for  the  alien  can  insist 
upon  having  six  of  his  jury  of  his  own  nation,  whilst  you  may 
have  twelve  Orangemen  on  yours. 

But  to  return  to  our  own  history.  The  reigns  of  the  First 
and  of  the  Second  George  passed  away ;  England  continued 
strong ;  she  persevered  in  oppression  and  injustice ;  she  was 
powerful  and  respected ;  she,  therefore,  disregarded  the  suffer- 
ings of  the  Irish,  and  increased  their  chains.  The  Cathohcs 
once  had  the  presumption  to  draw  up  a  petition ;  it  was  pre- 
sented to  Primate  Boulter,  then  governing  Ii-eland.  He  not 
only  rejected  it  with  scorn  and  without  a  reply,  but  treated  the 
insolence  of  daring  to  complain  as  a  crime,  and  punished  it  as 
an  offence,  by  recotnmending  and  procuring  still  more  severe 
laws  against  the  Papists,  and  the  more  active  execution  of  the 
former  statutes. 

But  a  new  era  advanced  ;  the  war  which  George  the  Sec- 
ond waged  on  account  of  Hanover  and  America,  exhausted 
the  resources,  and  lessened,  while  it  displayed,  the  strength 
of  England.  In  the  meantime  the  Duke  of  Bedford  was 
Lord  Lieutenant  of  Ireland.  The  ascendency  mob  of  DubUn, 
headed  by  a  Lucas,  insulted  the  Lord  Lieutenant  with  impu- 
nity, and  threatened  the  parliament.  All  was  riot  and  con- 
fusion within,  whilst  France  had  prepared  an  army  and  a  fleet 
for  the  invasion  of  Ireland.  Serious  danger  menaced  England. 
The  very  connection  between  the  countries  was  in  danger. 
The  Catholics  were,  for  the  first  time,  thought  of  with  favor. 
They  were  encouraged  to  address  the  Lord  Lieutenant,  and, 
for  the  first  time,  their  address  received  the  courtesy  of  a  re- 
ply. By  this  slight  civility  (the  more  welcome  for  its  novelty) 
the  warm  hearts  and  ready  hands  of  the  Irish  Catholics  were 
purchased.  The  foreign  foe  was  deterred  from  attempting  to 
invade  a  country  where  he  could  no  longer  have  found  a 
friend ;  the  domestic  insurgents  were  awed  into  silence ;  the 
Catholics  and  the  government,  simply  by  their  combination, 
saved  the  state  from  its  perils ;  and  thus  did  the  Catholics,  in 


ON  EEQUIRING  SECUEITIES    FROM  THE  CATHOLICS.  43 

a  period  of  danger,  and  upon  tlie  very  first  application,  and 
in  return  for  no  more  than  kind  words,  give,  what  we  want 
to  give,  security  to  the  empire. 

From  the  year  1759,  to  the  American  war,  England  enjoyed 
strength  and  peace ;  the  Catholics  were  forgotten,  or  recol- 
lected only  for  the  purposes  of  oppression.  England  in  her 
strength  and  her  insolence  oppressed  America  ;  she  persevered 
in  an  obstinate  and  absurd  course  of  vexation,  until  America 
revolted,  flew  to  arms,  conquered,  and  established  her  inde- 
pendence and  her  liberty. 

This  brings  us  to  the  second  stage  of  modem  Catholic  his- 
tory :  for  England,  having  been  worsted  in  more  than  one 
battle  in  America,  and  having  gained  victories  more  fatal 
than  many  defeats,  America,  aided  by  France,  having  pro- 
claimed independence,  the  English  period  for  liberahty  and 
justice  arrived,  for  she  was  in  distress  and  difficulty.  Dis- 
tracted at  home — baffled  and  despised  abroad,  she  was  com- 
pelled to  look  to  Irish  resources,  and  to  seek  for  security  in 
Ireland ;  accordingly,  in  the  year  1778,  our  Emancipation 
commenced ;  the  Cathohcs  were  hired  into  the  active  service 
of  the  state  by  an  easy  gratuity  of  a  small  share  of  their 
rights  as  human  beings,  and  they  in  return  gave,  what  we 
now  desire  to  give,  security  to  the  empire. 

The  pressure  of  foreign  evils,  however,  returned ;  Spain  and 
Holland  joined  with  France  and  America ;  success  in  her 
contest  with  the  Colonies  became  daily  more  hopeless.  The 
combined  fleets  swept  the  ocean;  the  Enghsli  channel  saw 
their  superiority ;  the  Enghsli  fleet  abandoned  for  a  while  the 
dominion  of  the  sea ;  the  national  debt  terrified  and  impover- 
ished the  country;  distress  and  difficulty  pressed  on  every 
side,  and,  accordingly,  we  arrived  at  the  second  stage  of  Ca- 
tholic Emancipation ;  for,  in  1782,  at  such  a  period  as  I  have 
described,  a  second  statute  was  passed,  enlarging  the  privi- 
leges of  the  Cathohcs,  and  producing,  in  their  gratitude  and 
zeal,  that  security  which  we  now  tender  to  the  sinking  vessel 
of  the  state. 

From  1782  to  1792,  was  a  period  of  tranquilhty ;  the  ex- 
penses of  the  government  were  diminished,  and  her  commerce 
greatly  increased.     The  loss  of  America,  instead  of  being  an 


4A:  SELECT   SPEECHES   OF  DANIEL   O'CONNELL. 

evil,  became  an  advantage  to  trade  as  well  as  to  liberty.     Eng- 
land again  flourislied,  and  again  forgot  us. 

In  1792,  the  Catholics  urged  their  claims,  as  they  had 
more  than  once  done  before.  But  the  era  was  inauspicious  to 
them,  for  England  was  in  prosperity.  On  the-  Continent,  the 
confederation  of  German  princes,  and  the  assemblage  of  the 
French  princes,  with  their  royalist  followers,  the  treaty  of  Pil- 
nitz,  and  the  army  of  the  King  of  Prussia,  gave  hope  of  crush- 
ing and  extinguishing  France  and  her  hberties  for  ever.  At 
that  moment  the  Catholic  petition  was  brought  before  parlia- 
ment; it  was  not  even  suffered,  according  to  the  course  of 
ordinary  courtesy,  to  lie  on  the  table  ;  it  was  rejected  with  indig- 
nation and  with  contempt.  The  head  of  the  La  Touche  fam- 
ily, which  has  since  produced  so  many  first-rate  Irishmen,  then 
retained  that  Huguenot  hatred  for  Cathohcs  which  is  still 
cherished  by  Samin,  the  Attorney-General  for  Ireland.  La 
Touche  proposed  that  the  petition  should  be  rejected,  and  it 
was  rejected  by  a  majority  of  200  to  only  13. 

Fortune,  however,  changed.  The  invasion  of  the  Prussians 
was  unsuccessful ;  the  French  people  worshipping  the  name, 
as  if  it  were  the  reality  of  liberty,  chased  the  Duke  of 
Brunswick  from  their  soil ;  the  King  of  Prussia,  in  the  Lut- 
trel  style,  sold  the  pass ;  the  German  princes  were  confound- 
ed, and  the  French  princes  scattered ;  Dumouriez  gained  the 
battle  of  Jemappes,  and  conquered  the  Austrian  Netherlands  ; 
the  old  governments  of  Europe  were  struck  with  consterna- 
tion and  dismay,  and  we  arrived  at  the  fourth,  and  hitherto 
the  last  stage  of  emancipation ;  for,  after  those  events,  in 
1793,  was  passed  that  act  which  gave  us  many  valuable  poUt- 
ical  rights — many  important  privileges. 

The  parliament — the  same  men  who,  in  1792,  would  not 
suffer  our  petition  to  lie  on  the  table — the  men  who,  in  1792, 
treated  us  with  contempt,  in  the  short  space  of  a  few  months, 
granted  us  the  elective  franchise.  In  1792,  we  were  desjDised 
and  rejected ;  in  1793,  we  were  flattered  and  favored.  The 
reason  was  obvious ;  in  the  year  1792,  England  was  safe ;  in 
1793  she  wanted  security,  and  security  she  found  in  the 
emancipation  of  the  Cathohcs,  partial  though  it  was  and  lim- 
ited.    The  spirit  of  republican  frenzy  was  abroad ;   the   en- 


ON  REQUIRING   SECURITIES  FROM  THE  CATHOLICS.  45 

tliusiasm  for  liberty,  even  to  madness,  pervaded  tlie  public 
mind.  The  Presbyterians  and  Dissenters  of  the  North  of 
Ireland  were  strongly  infected  with  that  mania ;  and  had  not 
England  wisely  and  prudently  bought  all  the  Cathohc  nobihty 
and  gentry,  and  the  far  greater  part  of  the  Cathohc  people 
out  of  the  market  of  republicanism,  that  which  fortunately 
was  but  a  rebelhon,  would,  most  assuredly,  have  been  revolu- 
tion. The  Presbyterians  and  CathoHcs  would  have  united, 
and,  after  wading  through  the  bloody  dehrium  of  a  sanguin- 
ary revolution,  we  should  now,  in  all  hkehhood,  have  some 
mihtary  adventurer  seated  on  the  throne  of  our  legitimate 
sovereign. 

But,  I  repeat  it,  England  judged  better ;  she  was  just  and 
kind,  and  therefore  she  has  been  preserved.  She  sought  for 
security  where  alone  it  could  be  found,  and  she  obtained  it. 

Thus,  in  1759,  England  wanted  security  against  the  turbu- 
lence of  her  ascendency  faction  in  Ireland,  and  against  the 
fleet  and  arms  of  France ;  she  was  civil  and  courteous  to  the 
Catholics,  and  the  requisite  security  was  the  result. 

Thus,  in  1778,  England  wanted  security  against  the  effects 
of  her  own  misconduct  and  misfortunes  in  America;  she 
granted  some  rights  of  property  to  the  Irish  Cathohcs,  and 
the  wanted  security  followed. 

Thus,  in  1782,  England  wanted  security  against  the  prodi- 
gahty  and  profligacy  of  her  administration — against  the  com- 
bined navies  of  France,  Spain,  and  Holland ;  she  conceded 
some  further  advantages  to  the  Catholics,  and  she  became  safe 
and  secure. 

Thus,  in  1795,  England  wanted  security  against  the  proba- 
ble consequences  of  the  disasters  and  treachery  of  the  Prus- 
sians— the  defeat  of  the  Austrians,  and  especially  against 
the  revolutionary  epidemic  distemper  which  threatened  the 
vitals  of  the  constitution ;  she  conferred  on  the  Catholics 
some  portion  of  pohtical  freedom,  and  the  Catholics  have  re- 
compensed her,  by  affording  her  subsequent  security. 

And  thus  has  Emancipation  been  in  all  its  stages  the  effect 
of  the  wants  of  England,  but,  at  the  same  time,  her  resources 
in  those  wants.  In  her  weakness  and  decay.  Emancipation 
has  given  her  health  and  strength ;  it  was  always  hitherto  a 


46  SELECT   SPEECHES    OF   DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

remedy,  and  not  in  itself  a  disease ;  it  was,  in  short,  her  best 
protection  and  security.  Away,  then,  with  those  idle,  those 
absurd  demands  for  control,  and  dominion  over  our  mode  of 
faith. 

Let  Grattan  learn  the  sentiments  of  the  Irish  people  ;  let 
him  know  that  we  are  ready  to  give  the  security  of  our  pro- 
perties and  our  lives  to  the  state  ;  but  we  wiU  not,  we  cannot, 
grant  away  any  part  of  our  religion.  Before  the  Union,  no 
vetoes,  no  arrangements,  no  inquisitions  over  our  prelates  were 
required. 

If  our  Protestant  fellow-countrymen  did  not  ask  them,  why 
should  the  English  suppose  we  can  grant  them  to  their  stupid 
caprice  ?  But  we  are  ready  to  give  them  security ;  we  are 
ready  to  secure  them  from  foreign  foes,  and  against  the  possi- 
biUty  of  domestic  dissension. 

Yes,  the  hour  of  your  Emancipation  is  at  hand ;  you  will, 
you  must  be  Emancipated ;  not  by  the  operation  of  any  force 
or  violence,  which  are  unnecessary,  and  would  be  illegal  on 
your  part,  but  by  the  repetition  of  your  constitutional  demands 
by  petition,  and  still  more  by  the  pressure  of  circumstances, 
and  the  great  progress  of  events.  Yes,  your  Emancipation  is 
certain,  because  England  wants  the  assistance  of  all  her  peo- 
ple. The  dream  of  dehvering  the  Continent  from  the  domin- 
ion of  Bonaparte  has  vanished.  The  idle  romance  of  German 
liberty — who  ever  heard  of  German  liberty? — is  now  a  cheerless 
vision.  The  allied  Russian  and  Prussian  armies  may,  perhaps, 
escape,  but  they  have  little  prospect  of  victory.  The  Ameri- 
cans have  avenged  our  outrages  on  their  seamen,  by  quench- 
ing the  meteor  blaze  of  the  British  naval  flag.  The  war  with 
the  world — England,  alone,  against  the  world — is  in  progress. 
We  shall  owe  to  her  good  sense,  what  ought  to  be  conceded  by 
her  generosity ;  she  cannot  proceed  without  our  aid ;  she 
knows  she  can  command  that  aid  if  she  will  but  be  just ;  she 
can,  for  liberty,  to  which  we  are  of  right  entitled,  command 
the  affections  and  the  energies  of  the  bravest  and  finest  peo- 
ple in  the  world ! 

BecoUect,  too,  that  the  financial  distress  of  England  accu- 
mulates. She  owes,  including  the  Irish  debt,  near  a  milHon  of 
millions.     Who  is  there  so  extravagant  as  to  suppose,  but  that 


ON  REQUIRING  SECURITIES  FROM  THE  CATHOLICS.  47 

there  must  arrive  a  period  at  which  it  will  become  impossible 
to  borrow  money,  or  to  pay  more  interest  ?  Our  Irish  debt 
has  already  exceeded,  by  nearly  two-thirds,  our  means.  We 
spend  sixteen  millions  annually,  and  we  collect,  in  revenue, 
about  five  millions.  Our  bank  puts  a  paltry  impression  on 
three  penny-worth  of  silver,  and  calls  it  tenpence.  In  short, 
with  taxes  increasing,  debts  accumulating,  revenue  diminish- 
ing, trade  exphing,  paper  currency  depreciating — who  is  so 
very  blind  as  not  to  perceive,  that  England  does  and  must  re- 
quire, the  consolidation  of  all  her  people  in  one  common  cause, 
and  in  one  common  interest  ? 

The  plain  path  to  safety — to  security — lies  before  her.  Let 
Irishmen  be  restored  to  their  inherent  rights,  and  she  may 
laugh  to  scorn  the  shock  of  every  tempest ;  the  arrangements 
which  the  abohtion  of  the  national  debt  may  require  will 
then  be  effectuated,  without  convulsion  or  disturbance ;  and 
no  foreign  foe  will  dare  to  pollute  the  land  of  fi'eemen  and  of 
brothers. 

They  have,  however,  struck  out  another  resource  in  Eng- 
land ;  they  have  resolved,  it  is  said,  to  resort  to  the  protec- 
tion of  Orange  Lodges.  That  system  which  has  been  declared 
by  judges  from  the  bench  to  be  illegal  and  criminal,  and  found 
by  the  experience  of  the  people  to  be  bigoted  and  bloody — the 
Orange  system,  which  has  marked  its  progress  in  blood,  in 
murder,  and  in  massacre — the  Orange  system,  which  has  des- 
olated Ireland,  and  would  have  converted  her  into  a  sohtude, 
but  for  the  interposing  hand  of  CornwaUis — the  Orange  system 
^vith  all  its  sanguinary  horrors  is,  they  say,  to  be  adopted  in 
England ! 

Its  prominent  patron,  we  are  told,  is  Lord  Kenyon  or  Lord 
Yarmouth  ;  the  first  an  insane  rehgionist  of  the  Welsh  Jum- 
per sect,  who,  bounding  in  the  air,  imagines  he  can  lay  hold 
of  a  limb  of  the  Deity,  hke  Macbeth,  snatching  at  the  air- 
drawn  dagger  of  his  fancy  !  He  would  be  simply  ridiculous, 
but  for  the  mischievous  mahgnity  of  his  holy  piety,  which  de- 
sires to  convert  Papists  from  their  errors,  through  the  instru- 
mentahty  of  daggers  of  steel.  Lord  Kenyon  may  enjoy  his 
ample  sinecures  as  he  pleases,  but  his  foUy  should  not  goad  to 
madness  the  people  of  Ireland. 


^  SELECT   SPEECHES   OF  DAXIEL  o'CO^'NELL. 

As  to  Lord  Tarmouth,  I  need  not,  indeed  I  could  not,  de- 
scribe him  ;  and  if  I  could,  I  would  not  disgust  myself  with 
the  description  ;  but  if  Lord  Kenjon  or  Lord  Yarmouth 
have  organized  the  Orange  system,  I  boldly  proclaim  that  he 
must  have  been  bribed  by  the  common  enemy.  Bigotry  is  not 
a  gi-atuitous  propensity.  Gififard  gets  money  for  his  calum- 
nies and  impudence  ;  so  does  Duigenan.  The  EngUsh  Orange 
patrons  must  be  bribed  by  France  ;  let  them  appeal  to  their 
private  Hves  to  repel  my  accusation.  Can  that  man  repel  it, 
whose  life  is  devoted  to  the  accumulation  of  wealth  to  be 
added  to  wealth,  ah'eady  excessive  and  enormous  ? — who 
never  was  suspected  of  principle  or  honor? — whose  finest 
feelings  were  always  at  market  for  money — who  was  ready 
to  wed  disgrace  vrith  a  rich  dowry,  and  would  have  espoused 
infamy  with  a  large  portion?  If  such  a  wretch  Hves,  let 
him  become  the  leader  of  the  Orange  banditti.  The  patron 
is  worthy  of  the  institution — the  institution  is  suited  to  the 
patron. 

You  know  full  well  that  I  do  not  exaggerate  the  horrors 
which  the  Orange  system  has  produced,  and  must  produce,  if 
revived  fi'om  authority,  in  this  country.  I  have,  in  some  of  the 
hireling  prints  of  London,  read,  under  the  guise  of  opposing 
adoption  of  the  Orange  system,  the  most  unfounded  praises  of 
ihe  conduct  of  the  L'ish  Orangemen.  They  were  called  loyal, 
and  worthy,  and  constitutional.  Let  me  hold  them  up  in  then" 
true  light.  The  first  authentic  fact  in  their  history  occurs  in 
1795.  It  is  to  be  found  in  the  address  of  Lord  Gosford,  to  a 
meeting  of  the  magistrates  of  the  coimty  of  Armagh,  con- 
vened by  his  lordship,  as  governor  of  that  county,  on  the  28th 
of  December,  1795.  Allow  me  to  read  the  following  passage 
from  that  address  : 

"Gentlemen — Having  requested  your  attendance  here  this  day,  it  be 
comes  my  duty  to  state  the  grounds  upon  which  I  thought  it  advisable 
to  propose  this  meeting  ;  and  at  the  same  time  to  submit  to  your  con- 
sideration a  plan  which  occm-s  to  me  as  most  likely  to  check  the  enor- 
mities that  have  akeady  brought  disgrace  upon  this  country,  and  may 
soon  reduce  it  into  deep  distress. 

"It  is  no  secret  that  a  persecution,  accompanied  with  all  the 
circumstances  of  ferocious  cruelty,  which  have  in  all  ages  distinguished 


ON  REQUIRING   SECURITIES  PROM  THE   CATHOLICS.  -49 

that  dreadful  calamity,  is  now  raging  in  this  country.  Neither  age 
nor  sex,  nor  even  acknowledged  innocence,  as  to  any  guilt  in  the  late 
disturbances,  is  sufficient  to  excite  mercy,  much  less  to  afford  protection. 

"The  only  crime  which  the  wretched  objects  of  this  ruthless  persecu- 
tion are  charged  mth,  is  a  crime,  indeed,  of  easy  proof  ;  it  is  simply  a 
profession  of  the  Roman  CathoUc  faith,  or  an  intimate  connection  with 
a  person  professing  this  faith.  A  lawless  banditti  have  constituted  them- 
selves judges  of  this  new-  species  of  dehnquency,  and  the  sentence  they 
have  denounced  is  equally  concise  and  terrible.  It  is  nothing  less  than 
a  confiscation  of  all  property,  and  an  immediate  banishment.  It  would 
be  extremely  painful,  and  surely  unnecessaiy,  to  detail  the  horrors 
that  are  attendant  on  the  execution  of  so  rude  and  tremendous  a  pro- 
scription— one  that  certainly^  exceeds  in  the  comparative  number  of 
those  it  consigns  to  ruin  and  miseiy,  every  example  that  ancient  and 
modern  history  can  supply;  for  where  have  we  heard,  or  in  what  story  of 
human  cruelties  have  we  read,  of  half  the  inhabitants  of  a  populous 
countiy  deprived,  at  one  blow,  of  the  means  as  well  as  the  fruits  of 
their  industry,  and  driven,  in  the  midst  of  an  inclement  season,  to 
seek  a  shelter  for  themselves,  and  their  helpless  famihes,  where  chance 
may  guide  them  ? 

"  This  is  no  exaggerated  picture  of  the  honid  scenes  that  are  now  act- 
ing in  this  countiy. " 

Here  is  the  first  fact  in  tlie  history  of  the  Orangemen. 
They  commenced  their  course  by  a  persecution  with  every 
cncumstance  of  ferocious  crulelty.  This  lawless  banditti,  as 
Lord  Gosford  called  them,  showed  no  mercy  to  age,  nor  sex, 
nor  acknowledged  innocence.  And  this  is  not  the  testimony 
of  a  man  favorable  to  the  rights  of  those  persecuted  Catholics  ; 
he  avows  his  intolerance  in  the  very  address  of  which  I  have 
read  you  a  part ;  and  though  shocked  at  these  Orange  enor- 
mities, he  still  exults  in  his  hostihty  to  Emancipation. 

After  this  damning  fact  from  the  early  history  of  the  Or- 
angemen, who  can  think  with  patience  on  the  revival  or  exten- 
sion of  this  murderous  association  ?  It  is  not,  it  ought  not,  it 
cannot  be  endured,  that  such  an  association  should  be  restored 
to  its  power  of  mischief  by  abandoned  and  unprincipled  coiu'- 
tiers.  But  I  have  got  in  my  possession  a  document  which  dem- 
onstrates the  vulgar  and  lowly  origin,  as  well  as  the  traitorous 
and  profligate  purpose  of  this  Orange  society.  It  has  been  re- 
peatedly sworn  to  in  judicial  proceedings,  that  the  original 
oath  of  an  Orangeman  was  an  oath  to  exterminate  the  Cathohcs. 


50  SELECT  SPEECHES   OP  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

In  some  years  after  the  society  was  formed,  men  of  a  liiglier 
class  of  society  became  members  of  it,  and  being  too  well  ed- 
ucated to  endure  the  plain  declaration  to  exterminate,  they 
changed  the  form  of  the  oath  to  its  present  shape,  but  care- 
fully retained  all  the  persecuting  spirit  of  the  Armagh  exter- 
minators. The  document  I  allude  to,  was  printed  for  the  use  of 
the  Orange  Lodges  ;  it  was  never  intended  for  any  eye  but  that 
of  the  initiated,  and  I  owe  it  to  something  better  than  chance 
that  I  got  a  copy  of  it ;  it  was  printed  by  William  M'Kenzie, 
printer  to  the  Grand  Orange  Lodge,  in  1810,  and  is  entitled, 
"  Rules  and  Regulations  for  the  use  of  all  Orange  Societies, 
revised  and  corrected  by  a  Committee  of  the  Grand  Orange 
Lodge  of  Ireland,  and  adopted  by  the  Grand  Orange  Lodge, 
January  10th,  .1810."  I  can  demonstrate  from  this  document 
that  the  Orange  is  a  vulgar,  a  profligate,  and  a  treasonable  as- 
sociation. To  prove  it  treasonable,  I  read  the  following,  which 
is  given  as  the  first  of  their  secret  articles  : — "  That  we  will 
bear  true  allegiance  to  his  Majesty,  his  heirs  and  successors, 
so  long  as  he  or  they  support  the  Protestant  ascendency." 

The  meaning  is  obvious,  the  Orangeman  will  be  loyal  just 
so  long  as  he  pleases.  The  traitor  puts  a  hmit  to  his  alle- 
giance, suited  to  what  he  shall  fancy  to  be  meant  by  the 
words  "  Protestamt  ascendency."  If  the  legislature  presumes 
to  alter  the  law  for  the  Ii'ish  Catholics  as  it  did  for  the  Han- 
overian Catholics,  then  is  the  Orangeman  clearly  discharged 
from  his  allegiance,  and  allowed,  at  the  first  convenient  oppor- 
tunity, to  raise  a  civil  war ;  and  this  is  what  is  called  a  loyal 
association.  Oh !  how  different  from  the  unconditional,  the 
ample,  the  conscientious  oath  of  allegiance  of  the  Lish  Catli- 
ohc !  I  pass  over  the  second  secret  article,  as  it  contains 
nothing  worthy  of  observation ;  but  from  the  third  I  shall  at 
once  demonstrate  what  pitiful  and  vulgar  dogs  the  original 
Orangemen  were.  Mark  the  third  secret  article,  I  pray  you — 
*'  That  we  will  not  see  a  brother  offended  for  sixpence  or  one 
shilling,  or  more  if  convenient,  which  must  be  returned  next 
meeting  if  possible."  Such  is  the  thu'd  of  the  secret  Orange 
articles.  I  presume  even  Lord  Yarmouth  will  go  with  them 
the  full  length  of  their  Hberahty  of  sixpence  or  one  shilhng, 
but  further  his  convenience  may  prevent  him. 


ON  REQUIEING  SECURITIES    FROM   THE  CATHOLICS.  51 

The  fourth  secret  article  is  quite  characteristic — "  That  we 
must  not  give  the  first  assault  to  any  person  whatsoever,  that 
may  bring  a  brother  into  trouble."  You  perceive  the  limita- 
tion. They  are  entitled  to  give  the  first  assault  in  all  cases, 
but  that  in  which  it  may  not  be  quite  prudent ;  they  are 
restricted  from  commencing  their  career  of  aggression,  unless 
they  are,  I  presume,  ten  to  one — unless  they  are  armed  and 
the  CathoHcs  disarmed — unless  their  superiority  in  numbers 
and  preparation  is  marked  and  manifest.  See  the  natural 
alliance  of  cowardice  with  ci-uelty.  They  are  ready  to  assault 
you,  when  no  brother  of  theirs  can  be  injured ;  but  if  there 
be  danger  of  injury  to  one  of  their  brotherhood,  they  are 
bound  to  restrain,  for  that  time,  their  hatred  of  the  Cathohcs, 
and  to  allow  them  to  pass  unattacked.  This  fourth  article 
proves,  better  than  a  volume,  the  aggressive  spuit  of  the  insti- 
tution, and  accounts  for  many  a  riot,  and  many  a  recent  mur- 
der. The  fifth  secret  article  exhibits  the  rule  of  Orangemen, 
with  respect  to  robbery.  "  5th.  We  are  not  to  carry  away 
money,  goods,  or  anything,  from  any  person  whatever,  except 
arms  and  ammunition,  and  those  only  from  an  enemy."  The 
rule  allows  them  to  commit  felony  to  this  extent — ^namely,  the 
arms  and  ammunition  of  any  CathoHc,  or  enemy ;  and  I  have 
heard  of  a  Cathohc  wiio  was  disarmed  of  some  excellent  sil- 
ver spoons,  and  a  silver  cup,  by  a  detachment  of  this  banditti. 
Yes,  Lord  Gosford  was  right,  when  he  called  them  a  lawless 
banditti;  for  here  is  such  a  regulation  as  could  be  framed 
only  for  those  whose  object  was  pluhder — whose  means  were 
murder.  The  sixth  and  seventh  secret  articles  relate  to  the 
attendance  and  enrolling  of  members;  but  the  eighth  is  of 
great  importance — it  is  this  : — "  8th  secret  article — An  Orange- 
man is  to  keep  his  brother's  secrets  as  his  own,  unless  in  case 
of  mm^der,  treason  and  perjury,  and  that  of  his  own  free  wiU." 
See  what  an  abundant  crop  of  crimes  the  Orangeman  is 
bound  to  conceal  for  his  brother  Orangeman.  Eilling  a 
Papist  may,  in  his  eyes,  be  no  murder,  and  he  might  be  bound 
to  conceal  that ;  but  he  is  certainly  bound  to  conceal  all  cases 
of  riot,  maiming,  wounding,  stabbing,  theft,  robbing,  rape, 
house-breaking,  house-burning,  and  every  other  human  vil- 
lany,  save  murder,  treason,  and  perjury.     These  are  the  good, 


5Z  SELECT  SPEECHES   OF  DANIEL   O  CONNELL. 

the  faitkful,  the  loyal  subjects.  They  may,  without  provoca- 
tion or  excuse,  attack  and  assault — give  the  first  assault,  mind, 
when  they  are  certain  no  brother  can  be  brought  to  trouble. 
They  may  feloniously  and  burglariously  break  into  dweUings, 
and  steal,  take,  and  carry  away  whatever  they  please  to  caU 
arms  and  ammunition.  And,  if  the  loyalty  of  a  brother 
tempts  him  to  go  a  little  further,  and  to  plunder  any  other 
articles,  or  to  burn  the  house,  or  to  violate  female  honor,  his 
brother  spectators  of  his  crime  are  bound  by  their  oaths  to 
screen  it  forever  from  detection  and  justice.  I  know  some 
men  of  better  minds  have  been,  in  their  horror  of  revolution- 
ary fury,  seduced  into  these  lodges,  or  have  unthinkingly  be- 
come members  of  them;  but  the  spirit,  the  object,  and  the 
consequences  of  this  murderous  and  plundering  association, 
are  not  the  less  manifest. 

I  do  not  calumniate  them ;  for  I  prove  the  history  of  their 
foundation  and  origin  by  the  unimpeachable  testimony  of  Vis- 
count Gosford,  and  I  prove  their  principles  by  their  own  secret 
articles,  the  genuineness  of  which  no  Orangeman  can  or  will 
deny.  If  it  were  denied,  I  have  the  means  of  proving  it  be- 
yond a  doubt.  And  when  such  principles  are  avowed,  when  so 
much  is  acknowledged  and  printed,  oh,  it  requires  but  little 
knowledge  of  human  nature  to  ascertain  the  enormities  which 
must  appear  in  the  practice  of  those  who  have  confessed  so 
much  of  the  criminal  nature  of  their  principles.  There  is,  how- 
ever, one  consolation.  It  is  to  be  found  in  their  ninth 
secret  article — "  No  Roman  Cathohc  can  be  admitted  on  any 
account."  I  thank  them  for  it,  I  rejoice  at  it ;  no  Roman 
Catholic  deserves  to  be  admitted.  No  Roman  Catholic  would 
desire  to  belong  to  a  society  permitting  aggression  and  vio- 
lence, when  safe  and  prudent,  permitting  robbery  to  a  certain 
extent,  and  authorizing  treason  upon  a  given  contingency. 
And  now  let  me  ask,  what  safety,  what  security  can  the  min- 
ions of  the  court  promise  to  themselves  from  the  encourage- 
ment of  this  association  ?  They  do  want  secuiity,  and  from 
the  Catholics  they  can  readily  have  it ;  and  you,  my  friends, 
may  Avant  security,  not  from  the  open  attacks  of  the  Orange- 
men— for  against  those  the  law  and  your  own  courage  wiU 
protect  you ;  but  of  their  secret  machinations  you  ought  to 
be  warned.     They  will  endeavor,  nay,  I  am  most  credibly  as- 


ON   REQUIKIITG    SECUEinES   FKOM  THE   CATHOLICS.  53 

surecl,  that  at  this  moment  their  secret  emissaries  are  endea- 
voring to  seduce  you  into  acts  of  sedition  and  treason,  that 
they  may  betray  and  destroy  you.  Recollect  what  happened 
httle  more  than  twelve  months  ago,  when  the  Board  detected 
and  exposed  a  similar  delusion  in  Dublin.  Recollect  the  un- 
punished conspkacy  which  was  discovered  at  Limerick  ;  un- 
punished and  unprosecuted  was  the  author.  Recollect  the 
Mayor's  Constable  of  Kilkenny,  and  he  is  stUl  in  office,  though 
he  administered  an  oath  of  secrecy,  and  gave  money  to  his  spy 
to  treat  the  country  people  to  liquor  and  seduce  them  to  trea- 
son. I  do  most  earnestly  conjure  you  to  be  on  your  guard,  no 
matter  in  what  shape  any  man  may  approach,  who  suggests 
disloyalty  to  you — no  matter  of  what  rehgion  he  may  affect  to 
be — no  matter  what  compassion  he  may  express  for  your  suf- 
ferings, what  promises  he  may  make  ;  believe  me,  that  any  man 
who  may  attempt  to  seduce  you  into  any  secret  association  or 
combination  whatsoever,  that  suggests  to  you  any  violation  of 
the  law  whatsoever,  that  dares  to  utter  in  your  presence  the  lan- 
guage of  sedition  or  of  treason,  depend  upon  it — take  my  word 
for  it,  and  I  am  your  sincere  friend — that  every  such  man  is  the 
hired  emissary  and  the  spy  of  your  Orange  enemies — that  his 
real  object  is  to  betray  you,  to  murder  you  under  the  forms  of 
a  judicial  trial,  and  to  ruin  your  country  for  your  guilt.  If,  on 
the  contrary,  you  continue  at  this  trying  moment  peaceful, 
obedient  and  loyal ;  if  you  avoid  every  secret  association,  and 
every  incitement  to  turbulence  ;  if  you  persevere  in  your  obe- 
dience to  the  laws,  and  in  fidehty  to  the  Crown  and  Constitution, 
your  Emancipation  is  certain,  and  not  distant,  and  your  coun- 
try will  be  restored  to  you  ;  your  natural  friends  and  protec- 
tors will  seek  the  redress  of  your  grievances  in  and  fi'om  parha- 
ment,  and  Ireland  will  be  again  free  and  happy.  If  you  suf- 
fer yourself  to  be  seduced  by  these  Orange  betrayers,  the 
members  of  the  Board  will  be  bound  to  resist  your  crimes 
with  their  lives  ;  you  will  bring  disgxace  and  ruin  on  our  cause ; 
you  will  destroy  yourself  and  your  families,  and  perpetuate  the 
degradation  and  disgrace  of  your  native  land.  But  my  fears 
are  vain.  I  know  your  good  sense  ;  I  rely  on  your  fidelity  ;  you 
will  continue  to  baffle  your  enemies ;  you  will  continue  faithful 
and  peaceable ;  and  thus  shall  you  preserve  yourselves,  promote 
your  cause,  and  give  security  to  the  empire. 


54  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL    o'CONNELL. 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE  OF  JOHN  MAGEE,  JULY  27, 

1813. 


Mb.  Magee  was  prosecuted  for  a  libel  on  the  Duke  of  Kichmond, 
in  the  Dublin  Evening  Journal,  of  which  he  was  the  proprietor. 
The  case  was  opened  by  Mr.  Kemmis,  followed  by  Attorney-Gen- 
eral Saurin.     Mr.  O'Connell's  reply  was  as  follows  : 

I  consented  to  the  adjournment  yesterday,  gentlemen  of  the 
jury,  from  this  impulse  of  nature  which  compels  us  to  post- 
pone pain  ;  it  is,  indeed,  painful  to  me  to  address  you  ;  it  is  a 
cheerless,  a  hopeless  task  to  address  you — a  task  which  would , 
require  all  the  animation  and  interest  to  be  derived  from  the 
working  of  a  mind  fully  fraught  with  the  resentment  and  dis- 
gust created  in  mine  yesterday,  by  that  farrago  of  helpless  ab- 
surdity with  which  Mr.  Attorney-General  regaled  you. 

But  I  am  now  not  sorry  for  the  delay.  Whatever  I  may  have 
lost  in  vivacity,  I  trust  I  shall  compensate  for  in  discretion. 
That  which  yesterday  excited  my  anger,  now  appears  to  me  to 
be  an  object  of  pity  ;  and  that  which  then  aroused  my  indig- 
nation, now  only  moves  to  contempt.  I  can  now  address  you 
with  feelings  softened,  and,  I  trust,  subdued  ;  and  I  do,  from 
my  soul,  declare,  that  I  now  cherish  no  other  sensations  than 
those  which  enable  me  to  bestow  on  the  Attorney-General,  and 
on  his  discourse,  pure  and  unmixed  compassion. 

It  was  a  discourse  in  which  you  could  not  discover  either 
order,  or  method,  or  eloquence  ;  it  contained  very  httle  logic, 
and  no  poetry  at  all ;  violent  and  virulent,  it  was  a  confused 
and  disjointed  tissue  of  bigotry,  amalgamated  with  congenial 
vulgarity.  He  accused  my  chent  of  using  Billingsgate,  and 
he  accused  him  of  it  in  language  suited  exclusively  for  that 
meridian.  He  descended  even  to  the  calling  of  names :  he 
called  this  young  gentleman  a  "malefactor,"  a  "  Jacobin,"  and 
a  "  ruffian,"  gentlemen  of  the  jury ;  he  called  him  "  abomina- 
ble," and  "  seditious,"  and  "  revolutionary,"  and  "  infamous," 
and  a  "  ruffian"  again,  gentlemen  of  the  jury ;  he  called  him  ji 
"  brothel  keeper,"  a  "  pander,"  "  a  kind  of  bawd  in  breeches," 
and  a  "  ruffian"  a  third  time,  gentlemen  of  the  jury. 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE   OF  JOHN  MAGEE.  55 

I  cannot  repress  my  astonishment,  how  Mr.  Attorney-Gen- 
eral could  have  preserved  this  dialect  in  its  native  purity  ;  he 
has  been  now  for  nearly  thirty  years  in  the  class  of  polished 
society ;  he  has,  for  some  years,  mixed  among  the  highest  or- 
ders in  the  state ;  he  has  had  the  honor  to  belong  for  thirty 
years  to  the  first  profession  in  the  world — to  the  only  profes- 
sion, with  the  single  exception,  perhaps,  of  the  military,  to 
which  a  high-minded  gentleman  could  condescend  to  belong — 
the  Irish  bar.  To  that  bar,  at  which  he  has  seen  and  heard  a 
Burgh  and  a  Duquery;  at  which  he  must  have  hstened  to  a 
Burston,  a  Ponsonby,  and  a  Curran ;  to  a  bar  which  still  con- 
tains a  Plunket,  a  Ball,  and  despite  of  politics,  I  will  add,  a 
Bushe.  With  this  galaxy  of  glory,  flinging  their  light  around 
him,  how  can  he  alone  have  remained  in  darkness  ?  How  has 
it  happened,  that  the  twihght  murkiness  of  his  soul  has  not 
been  illumined  with  a  single  ray  shot  from  their  lustre  ?  De- 
void of  taste  and  of  genius,  how  can  he  have  had  memory 
enough  to  preserve  this  original  vulgarity  ?  He  is,  indeed,  an 
object  of  compassion,  and,  from  my  inmost  soul,  I  bestow  on 
him  my  forgiveness,  and  my  bounteous  pity. 

But  not  for  him  alone  should  compassion  be  felt.  Recol- 
lect, that  upon  his  advice — that  with  him,  as  the  prime  mover 
and  instigator — those  rash,  and  silly,  and  irritating  meas- 
ures, of  the  last  five  years  which  have  afflicted  and  distracted 
this  long-suffering  country  have  originated — with  him  they 
have  all  originated.  Is  there  not  then  compassion  due  to  the 
millions,  whose  destinies  are  made  to  depend  upon  his  coun- 
sel ?  Is  there  no  pity  to  those  who,  hke  me,  must  know  that 
the  hberties  of  the  tenderest  pledges  of  their  affections,  and 
of  that  which  is  dearer  stiU,  of  their  country,  depends  on  this 
man's  advice  ? 

Yet  let  not  pity  for  us  be  unmixed ;  he  has  afforded  the 
consolation  of  hope  ;  his  harangue  has  been  heard  ;  it  will  bo 
reported — I  trust  faithfully  reported ;  and  if  it  be  but  read  in 
England,  we  may  venture  to  hope  that  there  may  remain  jusfc 
so  much  good  sense  in  England  as  to  induce  the  conviction  of 
the  folly  and  the  danger  of  conducting  the  government  of  a 
brave  and  long-enduring  people  by  the  counsels  of  so  taste- 
less and  talentless  an  adviser. 


56  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  o'CONNELL. 

See  wliat  an  imitative  animal  man  is !  The  sound  of  ruf- 
fian— ruffian — ruffian,  had  scarcely  died  on  the  Attorney-Gen- 
eral's lips,  when  you  find  the  word  honored  with  all  the  per- 
manency of  print,  in  one  of  his  pensioned  and  well-paid,  but 
ill-read  newspapers.  Here  is  the  first  line  in  the  Dubhn 
Journal  of  this  day  : — "  The  ruffian  who  writes  for  the  Free- 
man's Journal."  Here  is  an  apt  scholar — he  profits  well  of 
the  Attorney-General's  tuition.  The  pupil  is  worthy  of  the 
master — the  master  is  just  suited  to  the  pupU. 

I  now  dismiss  the  stylo  and  measure  of  the  Attorney-Gene- 
ral's discourse,  and  I  reqviire  your  attention  to  its  matter, 
that  matter  I  must  divide,  although  with  him  there  was  no 
division,  into  two  unequal  portions.  The  first,  as  it  was  by 
far  the  greater  portion  of  his  discourse,  shall  be  that  which 
was  altogether  inapphcable  to  the  purposes  of  this  prosecu- 
tion. The  second,  and  infinitely  the  smaUer  portion  of  his 
speech,  is  that  which  related  to  the  subject  matter  of  the 
indictment  which  you  are  to  try.  He  has  touched  upon  and 
disfigured  a  great  variety  of  topics.  I  shall  follow  him  at  my 
good  leisure  through  them.  He  has  invited  me  to  a  wide 
field  of  discussion.  I  accept  his  challenge  with  alacrity  and 
with  pleasure. 

This  extraneous  part  of  his  discourse,  which  I  mean  first 
to  discuss,  was  distinguished  by  two  leading  features.  The 
first,  consisted  of  a  duU  and  reproving  sermon,  with  which  he 
treated  my  colleagues  and  myself,  for  the  manner  in  which  we 
thought  fit  to  conduct  this  defence.  He  talked  of  the  melan- 
choly exhibition  of  four  hours  wasted,  as  he  said,  in  frivolous 
debate,  and  he  obscurely  hinted  at  something  hke  incorrect- 
ness of  professional  conduct.  He  has  not  ventured  to  speak 
out,  but  I  will.  I  shall  say  nothing  for  myself ;  but  for  my 
colleagues — my  inferiors  in  professional  standing,  but  infinitely 
my  superiors  in  every  talent  and  in  every  acquirement — my 
colleagues,  whom  I  boast  as  my  friends,  not  in  the  routine 
language  of  the  bar,  but  in  the  sincerity  of  my  esteem  and 
affection ;  for  my  learned  and  upright  colleagues,  I  treat  the 
unfounded  insinuation  with  the  most  contemj)tuous  scorn ! 

AU  I  shall  expose  is  the  utter  inattention  of  the  fact,  which, 
in  small  things  as  in  great,  seems  to  mark  the  Attorney-Gen- 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE  OF   JOHN  MAGEE.  57 

eral's  career.  He  talks  of  four  hours.  Why,  it  was  past  ono 
before  the  last  of  you  were  digged  together  by  the  Sheriff,  and 
the  Attorney-General  rose  to  address  you  before  three.  How 
he  could  contrive  to  squeeze  four  hours  into  that  interval,  is  for 
him  to  explain ;  nor  should  I  notice  it,  but  that  it  is  the  par- 
ticular prerogative  of  dullness  to  be  accurate  in  the  detail  of 
minor  facts,  so  that  the  Attorney-General  is  without  an  ex- 
cuse, when  he  departs  from  them,  and  when  for  four  hours 
you  have  had  not  quite  two.  Take  this  also  with  you,  that  we 
assert  our  uncontrollable  right  to  employ  them  as  we  have  done ; 
and  as  to  his  advice,  we  neither  respect,  nor  will  we  receive 
it ;  but  we  can  afford  cheerfully  to  pardon  the  vain  presump- 
tion that  made  him  offer  us  counsel. 

For  the  rest,  he  may  be  assured  that  we  will  never  imitate 
his  example.  We  will  never  volunteer  to  mingle  our  pohtics, 
whatever  they  may  be,  with  our  forensic  duties.  I  made  this 
the  rigid  rule  of  my  professional  conduct ;  and  if  I  shall  ap- 
pear to  depart  from  this  rule  now,  I  bid  you  recollect  that  I 
am  compelled  to  follow  the  Attorney-General  into  grounds 
which,  if  he  had  been  wise,  he  would  have  avoided. 

Yes ;  I  am  compelled  to  follow  him  into  the  discussion  of 
his  conduct  toward  the  Catholics.  He  has  poured  out  the  full 
vial  of  his  own  praise  on  that  conduct — praise  in  which,  I  can 
safely  assure  him,  he  has  not  a  single  unpaid  rival.  It  is  a 
topic  upon  which  no  unbribed  man,  except  liimseK,  dwells.  I 
admit  the  disinterestedness  with  which  he  praises  himself,  and 
I  do  not  envy  him  his  delight,  but  he  ought  to  know,  if  he  sees 
or  hears  a  word  of  that  kind  from  any  other  man,  that  that 
man  receives  or  expects  compensation  for  his  task,  and  really 
deserves  money  for  his  labor  and  invention. 

My  lord,  upon  the  Catholic  subject,  I  commence  with  one 
assertion  of  the  Attorney-General,  which  I  trust  I  misunder- 
stood. He  talked,  as  I  collected  him,  of  the  CathoHcs  having 
imbibed  principles  of  a  seditious,  treasonable,  and  revolutionary 
nature  !  He  seemed  to  me,  most  distinctly  to  charge  us  with 
treason !  There  is  no  relying  on  his  words  for  his  meaning — 
I  know  there  is  not.  On  a  former  occasion,  I  took  down  a  re- 
petition of  this  charge  full  seventeen  times  on  my  brief,  and 
yet,  afterwards,  it  turned  out  that  he  never  intended  to  mak  e 


58  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL   O'CONNELL. 

any  such  charge ;  that  he  forgot  he  had  ever  used  those  words, 
and  he  disclaimed  the  idea  they  naturally  convey.  It  is  clear, 
therefore,  that  upon  this  subject  he  knows  not  what  he  says; 
and  that  these  phrases  are  the  mere  flowers  of  his  rhetoric, 
but  quite  innocent  of  any  meaning  ! 

Upon  this  account  I  pass  liim  by,  I  go  beyond  him,  and  I 
content  myself  with  proclaiming  those  charges,  whosoever  may 
make  them,  to  be  false  and  base  calumnies  !  It  is  impossible 
to  refute  such  charges  in  the  language  of  dignity  or  temper. 
But  if  any  man  dares  to  charge  the  Catholic  body,  or  the 
Catholic  Board,  or  any  individuals  of  that  Board  with  sedition 
or  treason,  I  do  here,  I  shall  always  in  this  court,  in  the  city, 
in  the  field,  brand  him  as  an  infamous  and  profligate  liar ! 

Pardon  the  phrase,  but  there  is  no  other  suitable  to  the  oc- 
casion. But  he  is  a  profligate  liar  who  so  asserts,  because  he 
must  know  that  the  whole  tenor  of  our  conduct  confutes  the 
assertion.     What  is  it  we  seek  ? 

Chief  Justice. — What,  Mr.  O'Connell,  can  this  have  to  do 
with  the  question  which  the  jury  are  to  try  ? 

Mk.  O'Connell. — You  heard  the  Attorney-General  traduce 
and  calumniate  us — you  heard  him  with  patience  and  with 
temper — hsten  now  to  our  vindication  ! 

I  ask,  what  is  it  we  seek  ?  What  is  it  we  incessantly  and,  if 
you  please,  clamorously  petition  for  ?  Why,  to  be  allowed  to 
partake  of  the  advantages  of  the  constitution.  We  are  ear- 
nestly anxious  to  share  the  benefits  of  the  constitution.  We 
look  to  the  participation  in  the  constitution  as  our  greatest  po- 
litical blessing.  If  we  desired  to  destroy  it,  would  we  seek  to 
share  it  ?  If  we  wished  to  overturn  it,  would  we  exert  our- 
selves through  calumny,  and  in  peril,  to  obtain  a  portion  of 
its  blessings  ?  Strange,  inconsistent  voice  of  calumny  !  You 
charge  us  with  intemperance  in  our  exertions  for  a  participa- 
tion in  the  constitution,  and  you  charge  us  at  the  same  time, 
almost  in  the  same  sentence,  with  a  design  to  overturn  the  con- 
stitution. The  dupes  of  your  hypocrisy  may  beheve  you ; 
but  base  calumniators,  you  do  not,  you  cannot  believe  your- 
selves ! 

The  Attorney-General-jr"  this  wisest  and  best  of  men,"  as  his 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE  OF  JOHN  MAGEE.  69 

coUeague,  the  Solicitor-General,  called  him  in  his  presence — 
the  Attorney-General  next  boasted  of  his  triumph  over  Pope 
and  Popery — "  I  put  down  the  Catholic  Committee  ;  I  will  put 
down,  at  my  good  time,  the  CathoHc  Board."  This  boast  is 
partly  historical,  partly  prophecy.  He  was  wrong  in  his  his- 
tory— he  is  quite  mistaken  in  his  prophecy.  He  did  not  put 
down  the  CathoUc  Committee — we  gave  up  that  name  the 
moment  that  this  sapient  Attorney-General's  polemica-legal 
controversy  dwindled  into  a  mere  dispute  about  words.  He 
told  us  that  in  the  English  language  "  pretence  "  means  "  pur- 
pose ;"  had  it  been  French  and  not  Enghsh,  we  might  have 
been  inclined  to  respect  his  judgment,  but  in  point  of  EngHsh 
we  venture  to  differ,. with  him  ;  we  told  him  "  purpose,"  good 
Mr.  Attorney-General,  is  just  the  reverse  of  "  pretence."  The 
quarrel  grew  warm  and  animated :  we  appealed  to  common 
sense,  to  the  grammar  and  to  the  dictionary ;  common  sense, 
grammar,  and  the  dictionary,  decided  in  our  favor.  He  brought 
his  appeal  to  this  court,  your  lordship,  and  your  brethren 
unanimously  decided  that  in  point  of  law — mark,  mark,  gen- 
tlemen of  the  jury,  the  sublime  wisdom  of  the  law — the 
court  decided  that,  in  point  of  law,  "pretence"  does  mean 
"purpose !" 

Fully  contented  with  this  very  reasonable  and  more  satis- 
factory decision,  there  still  remained  a  matter  of  fact  between 
us  :  the  Attorney-General  charged  us  with  being  representa- 
tives ;  we  denied  all  representation.  He  had  two  witnesses  to 
prove  the  fact  for  him  ;  they  swore  to  it  one  way  at  one  trial, 
and  directly  the  other  way  at  the  next.  An  honorable,  intelli- 
gent, and  enlightened  jury  disbelieved  those  witnesses  at  the 
first  trial — matters  were  better  managed  at  the  second  trial — 
the  jury  were  better  arranged.  I  speak  delicately,  gentle- 
men ;  the  jury  were  better  arranged,  as  the  witnesses  were 
better  informed  ;  and,  accordingly,  there  was  one  verdict  for  us 
on  the  representative  question,  and  one  verdict  against  us. 

You  know  the  jury  that  found  for  us  ;  you  know  that  it  was 
Sir  Charles  Saxton's  Castle-list  jury  that  found  against  us. 
Well,  the  consequence  was,  that,  thus  encouraged,  Mr.  Attor- 
ney-General proceeded  to  force.  We  abhon-ed  tumult,  and 
were  weary  of  litigation ;  we  new-modelled  the   agents  and 


60  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

managers  of  the  Catholic  petitions  ;  we  formed  an  assembly, 
respecting  which  there  could  not  be  a  shadow  of  pretext  for 
calling  it  a  representative  body.  We  disclaim  representation ; 
and  we  rendered  it  impossible,  even  for  the  virulence  of  the 
most  mahgnant  law-officer  Uving,  to  employ  the  Convention 
Act  against  us — that,  even  upon  the  Attorney-General's  own 
construction,  requires  representation  as  an  ingredient  in  the 
offence  it  prohibits.  He  cannot  possibly  call  us  represen- 
tatives ;  we  are  individual  servants  of  the  public,  whose  busi- 
ness we  do  gratuitously  but  zealously.  Our  cause  has  ad- 
vanced even  from  his  persecution — and  this  he  calls  putting 
down  the  Cathohc  Committee ! 

Next,  he  glorifies  himself  in  his  prospect  of  putting  down  the 
Catholic  Board.  For  the  present,  he,  indeed,  tells  you,  that 
much  as  he  hates  the  Papists,  it  is  unnecessary  for  him  to  crush 
our  Board,  because  we  injure  our  own  cause  so  much.  He 
says  that  we  are  very  criminal,  but  we  are  so  foohsh  that  our 
folly  serves  as  a  compensation  for  our  wickedness.  We  are 
veiy  wicked  and  very  mischievous,  but  then  we  are  such  fool- 
ish httle  criminals,  that  we  deserve  his  indulgence.  Thus  he 
tolerates  offences  because  of  their  being  committed  sillily ;  and 
indeed,  we  give  him  so  much  pleasure  and  gratification  by  the 
injury  we  do  our  own  cause,  that  he  is  spared  the  superfluous 
labor  of  impeding  our  petition  by  his  prosecutions,  fines,  or 
imprisonments. 

He  expresses  the  very  idea  of  the  Boman  Domitian,  of 
whom  some  of  you  possibly  may  have  read ;  he  amused  his 
days  in  torturing  men — his  evenings  he  relaxed  in  the  humble 
cruelty  of  impaling  flies.  A  courtier  caught  a  fly  for  his  im- 
perial amusement — "  Fool,"  said  the  emperor,  "  fool,  to  give 
thyself  the  trouble  of  torturing  an  animal  that  was  about  to 
burn  its^f  to  death  in  the  candle  !"  Such  is  the  spirit  of  the 
Attorney-General's  commentary  on  our  Board.  Oh,  rare  At- 
torney-General ! — Oh,  best  and  wisest  of  men  ! 

But  to  be  serious.  Let  me  pledge  myself  to  you  that  he  im- 
poses on  you,  when  he  threatens  to  crush  the  Catholic  Board. 
Illegal  violence  may  do  it — force  may  effectuate  it ;  but  your 
hopes  and  his  will  be  defeated,  if  he  attempts  it  by  any  course 
of  law.     I  am,  if  not  a  lawyer,  at  least,  a  barrister.     On  tliis 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE  OP  JOHN  JilAGEE.  61 

subject  I  ought  to  know  sometliing,  and  I  do  not  liesitate  to 
contradict  the  Attorney-General  on  this  point,  and  to  proclaim 
to  you  and  to  the  country  that  the  Catholic  Board  is  perfectly 
a  legal  assembly — that  it  not  only  does  not  violate  the  law, 
but  that  it  is  entitled  to  the  protection  of  the  law,  and  in  the 
very  proudest  tone  of  firmness,  I  hurl  defiance  at  the  Attorney- 
General  ! 

I  defy  him  to  allege  a  law  or  a  statute,  or  even  a  proclama- 
tion that  is  violated  by  the  CathoUc  Board.  No,  gentlemen, 
no  ;  his  religious  prejudices — if  the  absence  of  every  charity 
can  be  called  anything  religious — ^his  rehgious  prejudices  real- 
ly obscure  his  reason,  his  bigoted  intolerance  has  totally 
darkened  liis  understanding,  and  he  mistakes  the  plainest 
facts  and  misquotes  the  clearest  law,  in  the  ardor  and  vehe- 
mence of  his  rancor.  I  disclaim  his  moderation — I  scorn  his 
forbearance — I  tell  him  he  knows  not  the  law  if  he  thinks  as 
he  says ;  and  if  Jhe  thinks  so,  I  tell  him  to  his  beard,  that  he 
is  not  honest  in  not  having  sooner  prosecuted  us,  and  I 
challenge  him  to  that  prosecution . 

It  is  strange — it  is  melancholy,  to  reflect  on  the  miserable 
and  mistaken  pride  that  must  inflate  him  to  talk  as  he  does  of 
the  Catholic  Board.  The  Catholic  Board  is  composed  of 
men — I  include  not  myself — of  course,  I  always  except  my- 
self— every  way  his  superiors,  in  birth,  in  fortune,  in  talents, 
in  rank.  What !  is  he  to  talk  of  the  Catholic  Board  Hghtly  ? 
At  their  head  is  the  Earl  of  Fingal,  a  nobleman  whose  exalted 
rank  stoops  beneath  the  superior  station  of  his  virtues — ^whom 
even  the  venal  minions  of  power  must  respect.  We  are  en- 
gaged, patiently  and  perseveringly  engaged,  in  a  struggle 
through  the  open  channels  of  the  constitution  for  our  liberties. 
The  son  of  the  ancient  earl  whom  I  have  mentioned  cannot 
in  his  native  land  attain  any  honorable  distinction  of  the 
state,  and  yet  Mr.  Attorney-General  knows  that  they  are  open 
to  every  son  of  every  bigoted  and  intemperate  stranger  that 
may  settle  amongst  us. 

But  this  system  cannot  last ;  he  may  insult,  he  may  calum- 
niate, he  may  prosecute ;  but  the  Catholic  cause  is  on  its  ma- 
jestic march  ;  its  progress  is  rapid  and  obvious ;  it  is  cheered 
in  its  advance,  and  aided  by  all  that  is  dignified  and  dispas- 


62  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

sionate — ^by  every  thing  that  is  patriotic — by  all  the  honor,  all 
the  integrity  of  the  empire ;  and  its  success  is  just  as  certain 
as  the  return  of  to-morrow's  sun,  and  the  close  of  to-morrow's 
eve. 

"  We  will — we  must  soon  be  emancipated,  in  despite  of  the 
Attorney-General,  aided  as  he  is  by  his  august  allies,  the 
aldermen  of  Skinner's  Alley.  In  despite  of  the  Attorney- 
General  and  the  aldermen  of  Skinner's  Alley,  our  emancipa- 
tion is  certain,  and  not  distant. 

I  have  no  difficulty  in  perceiving  the  motive  of  the  Attor- 
ney-General, in  devoting  so  much  of  his  medley  oration  to  the 
Cathohc  question,  and  to  the  expression  of  his  bitter  hatred  to 
us,  and  of  his  determination  to  ruin  our  hopes.  It  had,  to  be 
sure,  no  connection  with  the  cause,  but  it  had  a  direct  and  na- 
tural connection  with  you.  He  has  been,  all  his  life,  reckoned 
a  man  of  consummate  cunning  and  dexterity ;  and  whilst  one 
wonders  that  he  has  so  much  exposed  himseK  upon  those 
prosecutions,  and  accounts  for  it  by  the  proverbial  blindness  of 
rehgious  zeal,  it  is  still  easy  to  discover  much  of  his  native 
cunning  and  dexterity.  Gentlemen,  he  thinks  he  knows  his 
men — ^he  knows  you ;  many  of  you  signed  the  no-Popery  peti- 
tion ;  he  heard  one  of  you  boast  of  it ;  he  knows  you  would 
not  have  been  summoned  on  this  jury,  if  you  had  entertained 
liberal  sentiments ;  he  knows  all  this,  and,  therefore  it  is  that 
he,  with  the  artifice  and  cunning  of  an  experienced  nisi  prius 
advocate,  endeavors  to  win  your  confidence,  and  command 
your  affections  by  the  display  of  his  congenial  ilhberahty  and 
bigotry. 

You  are  all,  of  course,  Protestants;  see  what  a  compli- 
ment he  pays  to  your  religion  and  his  own,  when  he  endeavors 
thus  to  procure  a  verdict  on  your  oaths ;  when  he  endeavors  to 
seduce  you  to  what,  if  you  were  so  seduced,  would  be  perjury, 
by  indulging  your  prejudices,  and  flattering  you  by  the  coinci- 
dence of  his  sentiments  and  wishes.  Will  he  succeed,  gentle- 
men ?  Will  you  allow  him  to  draw  you  into  a  perjury  out  of 
zeal  for  your  religion  ?  And  will  you  violate  the  pledge  you 
have  given  to  your  God  to  do  justice,  in  order  to  gratify  your 
anxiety  for  the  ascendency  of  what  you  beheve  to  be  his 
church?      Gentlemen,  reflect  on  the  strange  and  monstrous 


SPEECH  IN    DEFENCE   OF  JOHN   MAGEE.  63 

inconsistencj  of  this  conduct,  and  do  not  commit,  if  you  can 
avoid  it,  the  pious  crime  of  violating  your  solemn  oaths,  in  aid 
of  the  pious  designs  of  the  Attorney- General  against  Popery. 

Oh,  gentlemen !  it  is  not  in  any  lightness  of  heart  I  thus 
address  you — it  is  rather  in  bitterness  and  sorrow ;  you  did  not 
expect  flattery  from  me,  and  my  client  was  little  disposed  to 
offer  it  to  you ;  besides,  of  what  avail  would  it  be  to  flatter,  if 
you  came  here  pre-determined,  and  it  is  too  plain  that  you  are 
not  selected  for  this  jury  from  any  notion  of  your  impar- 
tiality ? 

But  when  I  talk  to  you  of  your  oaths  and  of  your  religion 
I  would  fuU  fain  I  could  impress  you  with  a  respect  for  both 
the  one  and  the  other.  I,  who  do  not  flatter,  tell  you,  that 
though  I  do  not  join  with  you  in  behef,  I  have  the  most  un- 
feigned respect  for  the  form  of  Christian  faith  which  you  pro- 
fess. Would  that  its  substance,  not  its  forms  and  temporal 
advantages,  were  deeply  impressed  on  your  minds !  then 
should  I  not  address  you  in  the  cheerless  and  hopeless  de- 
spondency that  crowds  on  my  mind,  and  drives  me  to  taunt 
you  with  the  air  of  ridicule  I  do.  Gentlemen,  I  sincerely 
respect  and  venerate  your  religion,  but  I  despise  and  I  now 
a]3prehend  your  prejudices,  in  the  same  proportion  as  the  At- 
torney-General has  cultivated  them.  In  plain  truth,  every 
rehgion  is  good — every  rehgion  is  true  to  him  who,  in  his  due 
caution  and  conscience,  believes  it.  There  is  but  one  bad 
rehgion,  that  of  a  man  who  professes  a  faith  which  he  does 
not  believe ;  but  the  good  religion  may  be,  and  often  is,  cor- 
rupted by  the  vnretched  and  wicked  prejudices  which  admit  a 
difference  of  opinion  as  a  cause  of  hatred. 

The  Attorney-General,  defective  in  argument,  weak  in  his 
cause,  has  artfully  roused  your  prejudices  at  his  side.  I  have, 
on  the  contrary,  met  your  prejudices  boldly.  If  your  verdict 
shall  be  for  me,  you  will  be  certain  that  it  has  been  produced 
by  nothing  but  un"\viUing  conviction  resulting  from  sober  and 
satisfied  judgment.  If  your  verdict  be  bestowed  upon  the  ar- 
tifices of  the  Attorney-General,  you  may  happen  to  be  right ; 
but  do  you  not  see  the  danger  of  its  being  produced  by  an  ad- 
mixture of  passion  and  prejudice  with  your  reason?  How 
difficult  is  it  to  separate  prejudice  from  reason,  when  they  i-un 


64:  SELECT  SPEECHES   OF  DANIEL   o'CONNELL. 

in  the  same  direction.  If  you  be  men  of  conscience,  tlien  I 
call  on  you  to  listen  to  me,  that  your  consciences  may  be  safe, 
and  your  reason  alone  be  the  guardian  of  your  oath,  and  the 
sole  monitor  of  your  decision, 

I  now  bring  you  to  the  immediate  subject  of  this  indict- 
ment. Mr.  Magee  is  charged  with  publishing  a  libel  in  his 
paper  called  the  Dublin  Evening  Post.  His  lordship  has  de- 
cided that  there  is  legal  proof  of  the  pubUcation,  and  I  would 
be  sorry  you  thought  of  acquitting  Mr.  Magee  under  the  pre- 
tence of  not  beheving  that  evidence.  I  will  not,  therefore, 
trouble  you  on  that  part  of  the  case ;  I  will  tell  you,  gentle- 
men, presently,  what  this  pubhcation  is ;  but  sufifer  me  first  to 
inform  you  what  it  is  not — ^for  this  I  consider  to  be  very  im- 
portant to  the  strong,  and,  in  truth,  triumphant  defence  which 
my  client  has  to  this  indictment. 

Gentlemen,  this  is  not  a  hbel  on  Charles  Lennox,  Duke  of 
Richmond,  in  his  private  or  individual  capacity.  It  does  not 
interfere  with  the  privacy  of  his  domestic  hfe.  It  is  free  fi'om 
any  reproach  upon  his  domestic  habits  or  conduct ;  it  is  per- 
fectly pure  from  any  attempt  to  traduce  his  personal  honor 
or  integrity.  Towards  the  man,  there  is  not  the  least  taint  of 
malignity  ;  nay,  the  thing  is  still  stronger.  Of  Charles  Duke 
of  Eichmond,  personally,  and  as  disconnected  with  the  admin- 
istration of  pubhc  afi"ahs,  it  speaks  in  terms  of  civility  and 
even  respect.  It  contains  this  passage,  which  I  read  from  the 
indictment : — 

"  Had  lie  remained  what  lie  first  came  over,  or  what  lie  afterwards 
professed  to  be,  he  would  have  retained  his  reputation  for  honest  open 
hostility,  defending  his  poUtical  principles  with  firmness,  perhaps  with 
warmth,  but  without  rancor ;  the  supporter  and  not  the  tool  of  an  ad- 
ministration ;  a  mistaken  pohtician,  perhaps,  but  an  honorable  man  and 
a  respectable  soldier," 

The  Duke  is  here  in  this  libel,  my  lords — in  this  libel,  gen- 
tlemen of  the  jury,  the  Duke  of  Richmond  is  called  an  honor- 
able man  and  a  respectable  soldier !  Could  more  flattering 
expressions  be  invented  ?  Has  the  most  mercenary  press  that 
ever  yet  existed,  the  mercenary  press  of  this  metropolis,  con- 
tained   in  return  for   all  the    money  it  has    received,   any 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE   OF  JOHN  MAGEE.  65 

praise  wliicli  ouglit  to  be  so  pleasing — "an  honorable 
man  and  a  respectable  soldier?"  I  do,  therefore,  beg  of 
you,  gentlemen,  as  you  value  your  honesty,  to  carry  with 
you  in  your  distinct  recollection,  this  fact,  that  whatever  of 
bytI  this  publication  may  contain,  it  does  not  involve  any  re- 
proach against  the  Duke  of  Richmond,  in  any  other  than  in 
liis  pubhc  and  official  character. 

I  have,  gentlemen,  next  to  require  you  to  take  notice,  that 
this  pubhcation  is  not  indicted  as  a  seditious  libel.  The  word 
seditious  is,  indeed,  used  as  a  kind  of  make-weight  in  the  in- 
troductory part  of  the  indictment.  But  mark,  and  recollect, 
that  this  is  not  an  indictment  for  sedition.  It  is  not,  then,  for 
private  slander,  nor  for  any  offence  against  the  constitution, 
that  Mr.  Magee  now  stands  arraigned  before  you. 

In  the  third  place,  gentlemen,  there  is  this  singular  feature 
in  this  case,  namely — that  this  hbel,  as  the  prosecutor  calls  it, 
is  not  charged  in  this  indictment  to  be  "  false." 

The  indictment  has  this  singular  difference  from  any  other 
I  have  ever  seen,  that  the- assertions  of  the  publications  are 
not  even  stated  to  be  false. 

They  have  not  had  the  courtesy  to  you,  to  state  upon 
record,  that  these  charges,  such  as  they  are,  were  contrary  to 
the  truth.  This  I  beheve  to  be  the  first  instance  in  which  the 
allegation  of  falsehood  has  been  omitted.  To  what  is  this 
omission  to  be  attributed  ?  Is  it  that  an  experiment  is  to  be 
made,  how  much  further  the  doctrine  of  the  criminahty  of 
truth  can  be  drawn?  Does  the  prosecutor  wish  to  make 
another  bad  precedent?  or  is  it  in  contempt  of  any  dis- 
tinction between  truth  and  falsehood,  that  this  charge  is 
thus  framed  ?  or  does  he  fear  that  you  would  scruple  to  con- 
vict, if  the  indictment  charged  that  to  be  false,  which  you  all 
know  to  be  true  ? 

However  that  may  be,  I  will  have  you  to  remember,  that 
you  are  now  to  pronounce  upon  a  pubhcation,  the  truth  of 
which  is  not  controverted.  Attend  to  the  case,  and  you  will 
find  you  are  not  to  try  Mr.  Magee  for  sedition  which  may 
endanger  the  state,  or  for  private  defamation  which  may  press 
sorely  upon  the  heart,  and  blast  the  prospects  of  a  private 
family ;  and  that  the  subject  matter  for  your  decision  is  not 
characterized  as  false,  or  described  as  untrue. 


66  SELECT    SPEECHES   OF  DANIEL  o'CONNELL. 

Sucli  are  the  circumstances  which  accompany  this  pubHca- 
tion,  on  which  you  are  to  pronounce  a  verdict  of  guilt  or  inno- 
cence. The  case  is  with  you  ;  it  belongs  to  you  exclusively  to 
decide  it.  His  lordship  may  advise,  but  he  cannot  control  your 
decision,  and  it  belongs  to  you  alone  to  say  whether  or  not, 
upon  the  entire  matter,  you  conceive  it  to  be  evidence  of  guilt, 
and  deserving  of  punishment.  The  statute  law  gives  or  recog- 
nizes this  your  right,  and,  therefore,  imposes  this  on  you  as 
your  duty.  The  legislative  has  precluded  any  lawyer  from  be- 
ing able  to  dictate  to  you.  The  Sohcitor-General  cannot  now 
venture  to  promulgate  the  slavish  doctrine  which  he  addressed 
to  Doctor  Sheridan's  jury,  when  he  told  them,  "  not  to  presume 
to  differ  from  the  Court  in  matter  of  law."  The  law  and  the 
fact  are  here  the  same,  namely — the  guilty  or  innocent  design 
of  the  publication. 

Indeed,  in  any  criminal  case,  the  doctrine  of  the  Sohcitor- 
General  is  intolerable.  I  enter  my  solemn  protest  against  it. 
The  verdict  which  is  required  from  the  juij  in  any  criminal 
case  has  nothing  special  in  it — it  is  not  the  finding  of  the  fact 
in  the  affirmative  or  negative — it  is  not,  as  in  Scotland,  that 
the  charge  is  proved  or  not  proved.  No ;  the  jury  is  to  say 
whether  the  prisoner  be  guilty  or  not ;  and  could  a  juror  find  a 
true  verdict,  who  declared  a  man  guilty  upon  evidence  of  some 
act,  perhaps  praiseworthy,  but  clearly  void  of  evil  design  or 
bad  consequences  ? 

I  do,  therefore,  deny  the  doctrine  of  the  learned  gentleman ; 
it  is  not  constitutional,  and  it  would  be  frightful  if  it  were. 
No  judge  can  dictate  to  a  jury — ^no  jury  ought  to  allow  itself 
to  be  dictated  to. 

If  the  Sohcitor-General's  doctiine  were  estabhshed,  see 
what  oppressive  consequences  might  result.  At  some  future 
period,  some  man  may  attain  the  first  place  on  the  bench,  by 
the  reputation  which  is  so  easily  acquired  by  a  certain  degree 
of  chm'ch-wardening  piety,  added  to  a  great  gravity,  and  mai- 
denly decorum  of  manners.  Such  a  man  may  reach  the  bench 
— for  I  am  putting  an  imaginary  case — he  may  be  a  man  with- 
out passions,  and  therefore  without  vices ;  he  may,  my  lord, 
be  a  man  superfluously  rich,  and  therefore,  not  to  be  bribed 
with    money,    but    rendered    partial    by    his    bigotry,    and 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE  OP  JOHN  MAGEE.  67 

corrupted  by  his  prejudices  ;  such  a  man,  inflated  by  flat- 
tery, and  bloated  in  his  dignity,  may  hereafter  use  that 
character  for  sanctity  which  has  served  to  promote  him,  as  a 
sword,  to  hew  down  the  strugghng  hberties  of  his  country ; 
such  a  judge  may  interfere  before  trial !  and  at  the  trial  be  a 
partisan ! 

Gentlemen,  should  an  honest  jury — could  an  honest  jury  (if 
an  honest  jury  were  again  found)  listen  with  safety  to  the  dic- 
tates of  such  a  judge  ?  I  repeat  it,  therefore,  that  the  Sohci- 
tor- General  is  mistaken — that  the  law  does  not,  and  cannot, 
require  such  a  submission  as  he  preached ;  and  at  all  events, 
gentlemen,  it  cannot  be  controverted,  that  in  the  present  in- 
stance, that  of  an  alleged  hbel,  the  decision  of  all  law  and  fact 
belongs  to  you. 

I  am  then  warranted  in  directing  to  you  some  observations 
on  the  law  of  hbel,  and  in  doing  so,  I  disclaim  any  apology 
for  the  consumption  of  the  time  necessary  for  my  purpose. 
Gentlemen,  my  intention  is  to  lay  before  you  a  short  and  rapid 
view  of  the  causes  which  have  introduced  into  courts  the  mon- 
strous assertion — that  truth  is  crime  ! 

It  is  to  be  deeply  lamented,  that  the  art  of  printing  was  un- 
known at  the  earher  periods  of  our  history.  If,  at  the  time 
the  barons  wrung  the  simple  but  subhme  charter  of  hberty 
from  a  timid,  perfidious  sovereign,  from  a  violator  of  his 
word,  from  a  man  covered  with  disgrace,  and  sunk  in  infamy 
— if  at  the  time  when  that  cliarter  was  confirmed  and  re- 
newed, the  press  had  existed*  it  would,  I  think,  have  been  the 
first  care  of  those  friends  of  freedom  to  have  estabhshed  a 
principle  of  liberty  for  it  to  rest  upon,  which  might  resist  every 
future  assault.  Their  simple  and  unsophisticated  understand- 
ings could  never  be  brought  to  comprehend  the  legal  subtle- 
ties by  which  it  is  now  argued,  that  falsehood  is  useful  and  in- 
nocent, and  truth,  the  emanation  and  type  of  heaven,  a  crime. 
They  would  have  cut  with  their  swords  the  cobweb  links  of  so- 
phistry in  which  truth  is  entangled ;  and  they  would  have 
rendered  it  impossible  to  re-estabhsh  this  injustice  without 
violating  the  principle  of  the  constitution. 

But  in  the  ignorance  of  the  blessing  of  a  free  press,  they 
could  not  have  provided  for  its  security.     There  remains,  how- 


68  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  o'CONNELL. 

ever,  an  expression  of  their  sentiments,  on  our  statute  books, 
The  ancient  parliament  did  pass  a  law  against  the  spreaders 
of  false  rumors.  This  law  proves  two  things — first,  that  be- 
fore this  statute,  it  was  not  considered  a  crime  in  law  to  spread 
even  a  false  rumor,  otherwise  the  statute  would  have  been  un- 
necessary ;  and  secondly,  that  in  their  notion  of  crime,  false- 
hood was  a  necessary  ingredient.  But  here  I  have  to  remark 
upon,  and  regret  the  strange  propensity  of  judges,  to  construe 
the  law  in  favor  of  tyranny,  and  against  liberty ;  for  servile 
and  corrupt  judges  soon  decided,  that  upon  the  construction 
of  this  law,  it  was  immaterial  whether  the  rumors  were  true  or 
false,  and  that  a  law  made  to  punish  false  rumors,  was  equally 
apphcable  to  the  true. 

This,  gentlemen,  is  called  construction ;  it  is  just  that  which 
in  more  recent  times,  and  of  inevitable  consequence,  from 
purer  motives,  has  converted  "pretence"  into  "purpose." 

When  the  art  of  printing  was  invented,  its  value  to  every 
sufferer — its  terror  to  every  oppressor  was  soon  obvious,  and 
means  were  speedily  adopted  to  prevent  its  salutary  effects. 
The  Star-Chamber — the  odious  Star-Chamber  was  either  cre- 
ated, or,  at  least,  enlarged  and  brought  into  activity.  Its  pro- 
ceedings were  arbitrary — its  decisions  were  oppressive,  and 
injustice  and  tyranny  were  formed  into  a  system.  To  describe 
it  to  you  in  one  sentence,  it  was  a  prematurely  packed  jury. 
Perhaps  that  description  does  not  shock  you  much.  Let  me 
report  one  of  its  decisions  which  will,  I  think,  make  its  hor- 
rors more  sensible  to  you — it  is  a  ludicrous  as  well  as  a  mel- 
ancholy instance. 

A  tradesman — a  ruffian,  I  presume,  he  was  styled — in  an 
altercation  with  a  nobleman's  servant,  called  the  swan,  which 
was  worn  on  the  servant's  arm  for  a  badge,  a  goose.  For  this 
offence — the  calling  the  nobleman's  badge  of  a  swan  a  goose, 
he  was  brought  before  the  Star-Chamber — he  was,  of  course, 
convicted ;  he  lost,  as  I  recollect,  one  of  his  ears  on  the  pil- 
lory— was  sentenced  to  two  years'  imprisonment,  and  a  fine  of 
X500 ;  and  all  this  to  teach  him  to  distinguish  swans  from  geese. 

I  now  ask  you,  to  what  is  it  you  tradesmen  and  merchants 
are  indebted  for  the  safety  and  respect  you  can  enjoy  in 
society  ?     What  is  it  which  has  rescued  you  from  the  slavery 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE  OF  JOHN  MAGEE.  69 

in  wliieli  persons  who  are  engaged  in  trade  were  held  by  the 
iron  barons  of  former  days  ?  I  will  tell  you ;  it  is  the  hght, 
the  reason,  and  the  liberty  which  have  been  created,  and  will, 
in  despite  of  every  opposition,  be  perpetuated  by  the  exertion 
of  the  press. 

Gentlemen,  the  Star-Chamber  was  particularly  vigilant  over 
the  infant  struggles  of  the  press.  A  code  of  laws  became 
necessary  to  govern  the  new  enemy  to  prejudice  and  oppres- 
sion— the  Press.  The  Star-Chamber  adopted,  for  this  pur- 
pose, the  civil  law,  as  it  is  called — the  law  of  Eome — not  the 
law  at  the  periods  of  her  liberty  and  her  glory,  but  the  law 
which  was  promulgated  when  she  fell  into  slavery  and  dis- 
grace, and  recognized  this  principle,  that  the  will  of  the  prince 
was  the  rule  of  the  law.  The  civil  law  was  adopted  by  the 
Star-Chamber  as  its  guide  in  proceedings  against,  and  in  pun- 
ishing libellers  ;  but,  unfortunately,  only  part  of  it  was  adopted, 
and  that,  of  course,  was  the  part  ieast  favorable  to  freedom. 
So  much  of  the  civil  law  as  assisted  to  discover  the  concealed 
libeller,  and  to  punish  him  when  discovered,  was  carefully 
selected  ;  but  the  civil  law  allowed  truth  to  be  a  defence,  an-d 
that  part  was  carefuUy  rejected. 

The  Star-Chamber  was  soon  after  abolished.  It  was  sup- 
pressed by  the  hatred  and  vengeance  of  an  outraged  people, 
and  it  has  since,  and  imtil  our  days,  lived  only  in  the  recollec- 
tion of  abhorrence  and  contempt.  But  we  have  fallen  upon  bad 
days  and  evil  times ;  and  in  our  days  we  have  seen  a  lawyer, 
long  of  the  prostrate  and  degraded  bar  of  England,  presume 
to  suggest  a  high  eulogium  on  the  Star-Chamber,  and  regret 
its  downfall ;  and  he  has  done  this  in  a  book  dedicated,  by 
permission,  to  Lord  Ellenborough.  This  is,  perhaps,  an  omi- 
nous circumstance ;  and  as  Star-Chamber  punishments  have 
been  revived — as  two  years  of  imprisonment  has  become  fami- 
liar, I  know  not  how  soon  the  useless  lumber  of  even  well- 
selected  juries  may  be  abolished,  and  a  new  Star-Chamber 
created. 

From  the  Star-Chamber,  gentlemen,  the  prevention  and 
punishment  of  hbels  descended  to  the  courts  of  common  law, 
and  with  the  power  they  seem  to  have  inherited  much  of  tho 
spirit  of  that  tribunal.     Servility  at  the  bar,  and  profligacy  on 


70  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL    O'CONNELL. 

the  bencli,  liave  not  been  wanting  to  aid  every  construction  un- 
favorable to  freedom,  and  at  length  it  is  taken  as  granted  and 
as  clear  law,  that  truth  or  falsehood  are  quite  immaterial  cir- 
cumstances, constituting  no  part  of  either  guilt  or  innocence. 

I  would  wish  to  examine  this  revolting  doctrine,  and,  in 
doing  so,  I  am  proud  to  teU  you,  that  it  has  no  other  founda- 
tion than  in  the  oft-repeated  assertions  of  lawyers  and  judges. 
Its  authority  depends  on  what  are  technically  called  the  dicta 
of  the  judges  and  writers,  and  not  upon  solemn  or  regular 
adjudications  on  the  point.  One  servile  lawyer  has  repeated 
this  doctrine,  from  time  to  time,  after  another — and  one  over- 
bearing judge  has  re-echoed  the  assertion  of  a  time-serving 
predecessor,  and  the  pubHc  have,  at  length,  submitted. 

I  do,  therefore,  feel,  not  only  gratified  in  having  the  occa- 
sion, but  bound  to  express  my  opinion  upon  the  real  law  of 
this  subject.  I  know  that  opinion  is  but  of  httle  weight.  I 
have  no  professional  rank,  or  station,  or  talents  to  give  it  im- 
portance, but  it  is  an  honest  and  conscientious  opinion,  and  it 
is  this — that  in  the  discussion  of  pubhc  subjects,  and  of  the 
administration  of  pubhc  men,  truth  is  a  duty  and  not  a  crime. 

You  can,  at  least,  understand  my  description  of  the  liberty 
of  the  press.  That  of  the  Attorney-General  is  as  unintelligi- 
ble as  contradictory.  He  tells  you,  in  a  very  odd  and  quaint 
phrase,  that  the  hberty  of  the  press  consists  in  there  being  no 
previous  restraint  upon  the  tongue  or  the  pen.  How  any  pre- 
vious restraint  could  be  imposed  on  the  tongue  it  is  for  this 
wisest  of  men  to  tell  you,  unless,  indeed,  he  resorts  to  Dr. 
Lad's  prescription  with  respect  to  the  toothache  eradication. 
Neither  can  the  absence  of  previous  restraint  constitute  a  free 
press,  unless,  indeed,  it  shall  be  distinctly  ascertained,  and 
clearly  defined,  what  shall  be  subsequently  called  a  crime.  If 
the  crime  of  libel  be  undefined,  or  uncertain,  or  capricious, 
then,  instead  of  the  absence  of  restraint  before  publication 
being  an  advantage,  it  is  an  injury ;  instead  of  its  being  a  bless- 
ing, it  is  a  curse — it  is  nothing  more  than  a  pitfall  and  snare 
for  the  unwary.  Tliis  hberty  of  the  press  is  only  an  ojjpor- 
tunity  and  a  temptation  offered  by  the  law  to  the  commis- 
sion of  crime — it  is  a  trap  laid  to  catch  men  for  punish- 
ment— it  is  not  the  liberty  of  discussing  truth  or  discoun- 


-  ^ 


SPEECH  IN   DEFENCE  OF  JOHN  MAGEE.  71 

tenancing  oppression,  but  a  mode  of  rearing  up  victims  for 
prosecution,  and  of  seducing  men  into  imprisonment. 

Yet,  can  any  gentleman  concerned  for  the  Crown  give  me  a 
definition  of  the  crime  of  Ubel  ?  Is  it  not  uncertain  and  un- 
defined ;  and,  in  truth,  is  it  not,  at  this  moment,  quite  subject 
to  the  caprice  and  whim  of  the  judge  and  of  the  jury '?  Is  the 
Attorney -General — is  the  Sohcitor-General  disposed  to  say 
otherwise?  If  he  do,  he  must  contradict  his  own  doctrine, 
and  adopt  mine. 

But  no,  gentlemen,  they  must  leave  you  in  uncertainty  and 
doubt,  and  ask  you  to  give  a  verdict,  on  your  oath,  without 
furnishing  you  with  any  rational  materials  to  judge  whether 
you  be  right  or  wrong.  Indeed,  to  such  a  wild  extent  of  ca- 
price has  Lord  Ellenborough  carried  the  doctrine  of  crime  in 
libel,  that  he  appears  to  have  gravely  ruled,  that  it  was  a  crime 
to  call  one  lord  "a  stout-built,  special  pleader,"  although,  in 
point  of  fact,  that  lord  was  stout-built,  and  had  been  very 
many  years  a  special  pleader.  And  that  it  was  a  crime  to  call 
another  lord,  "  a  sheep-feeder  from  Cambridgeshire,"  although 
that  lord  was  right  glad  to  have  a  few  sheep  in  that  county. 
These  are  the  extravagant  vagaries  of  the  Crown  lawyers  and 
prerogative  judges ;  you  will  find  it  impossible  to  discover  any 
rational  rule  for  your  conduct,  and  can  never  rest  upon  any 
satisfactory  view  of  the  subject,  unless  you  are  pleased  to 
adopt  my  description.  Keason  and  justice  equally  recognize 
it,  and  believe  me,  that  genuine  law  is  much  more  closely  con- 
nected with  justice  and  reason  than  some  persons  will  avow. 

Gentlemen,  you  are  now  apprised  of  the  nature  of  the 
alleged  hbel ;  it  is  a  discussion  upon  the  administration  of 
pubhc  men.  I  have  also  submitted  to  you  my  view  of  the 
law  applicable  to  such  a  pubHcation ;  we  are,  therefore,  pre- 
pared to  go  into  the  cojctsideration  of  every  sentence  in  the 
newspaper  in  question. 

But  before  I  do  so,  just  allow  me  to  point  your  attention  to 
the  motives  of  this  young  gentleman.  The  Attorney-General 
has  threatened  him  with  fine  and  a  dungeon ;  he  has  told  Mr. 
Magee  that  he  should  suffer  in  liis  purse  and  in  his  person. 
Mr.  Magee  knew  his  danger  well.  Mr.  Magee,  before  he  pub- 
lished this  paper,  was  quite  apprised  that  he  ran  the  risk  of 


72  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

fine  and  of  imprisonment.  He  knew  also  tliat  if  he  changed 
his  tone — that  if  he  became  merely  neutral,  but  especially,  if 
he  went  over  to  the  other  side  and  praised  the  Duke  of  Eich- 
mond — if  he  had  sufficient  gravity  to  talk,  without  a  smile,  of 
the  sorrow  of  the  people  of  Ireland  at  his  Grace's  departure — 
if  he  had  a  \isage  sufficiently  lugubrious  to  say  so,  without 
laughing,  to  cry  out  "  mournfully,  oh !  mournfully !"  for  the  de- 
parture of  the  Duke  of  Bichmond — if  at  a  period  when  the 
people  of  Ireland,  from  Magherafelt  to  Dingledecouch,  are 
rejoicing  at  that  departure,  Mr.  Magee  could  put  on  a  solemn 
countenance  and  pick  up  a  grave  and  narcotic  accent,  and 
have  the  resolution  to  assert  the  sorrow  of  the  people  for  los- 
ing so  sweet  and  civil  a  Lord  Lieutenant — why,  in  that  case, 
gentlemen,  you  know  the  consequences.  They  are  obvious. 
He  might  libel  certain  classes  of  his  Majesty's  subjects  with 
impunity ;  he  would  get  abundance  of  money,  a  place,  and  a 
pension — you  know  he  would.  The  proclamations  would  be 
inserted  in  his  paper.  The  wide-street  advertisements,  the 
ordnance,  the  barrack-board  notices,  and  the  advertisements 
of  all  the  other  public  boards  and  offices — you  can  scarcely 
calculate  how  much  money  he  sacrifices  to  his  principles.  I 
am  greatly  within  bounds  when  I  say,  at  least,  X5,000  per 
annum,  of  the  pubhc  money,  would  reach  him  if  he  were  to 
alter  his  tone,  and  abandon  his  opinions. 

Has  he  instructed  me  to  boast  of  the  sacrifices  he  thus 
makes  ?  No,  gentlemen,  no,  no  ;  he  deems  it  no  sacrifice,  be- 
cause he  desires  no  share  in  the  pubhc  plunder ;  but  I  intro- 
duce this  topic  to  demonstrate  to  you  the  pmity  of  his  inten- 
tions. He  cannot  be  actuated,  in  the  part  he  takes,  by  mean  or 
mercenary  motives ;  it  is  not  the  base  lucre  of  gain  that  leads 
him  astray.  If  he  be  mistaken,  he  is,  at  least,  disinterested 
and  sincere.  You  may  dislike  his  j)oHtical  oj^inions,  but  you 
cannot  avoid  respecting  the  indej)endence  of  his  principles. 

Behold,  now,  the  pubhcation  which  this  man  of  pure  princi- 
ples is  called  to  answer  for  as  a  hbel.     It  commences  thus  : — 

"duke  of  eichmond. 

"  As  the  Duke  of  Riclimond  will  shortly  retire  from  the  government 
of  Ireland,  it  has  been  deemed  necessary  to  take  such  a  review  of  his 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE  OF  JOHN  MAGEE.  73 

administration  as  may,  at  least,  warn  liis  successor  from  pursuing  the 
errors  of  his  Grace's  conduct, 

"The  review  shall  contain  many  anecdotes  of  the  Irish  court  which 
were  never  published,  and  which  were  so  secret,  that  his  Grace  will 
not  fail  to  be  surprised  at  the  sight  of  them  in  a  newspaper." 

In  tliis  paragraph  there  is  nothmg  libellous  ;  it  talks  of  the 
errors,  indeed,  of  his  Grace's  administration ;  but  I  do  not 
think  the  Attorney-General  will  venture  to  suggest,  that  the 
gentle  expression  of  "  errors,"  is  a  hbeh 

To  err,  gentlemen,  is  human  :  and  his  Grace  is  admitted,  by 
the  Attorney-General,  to  be  but  a  man ;  I  shall  waste  none  of 
your  time  in  proving,  that  we  may,  without  offence,  treat  of 
his  "  errors."  But,  this  is  not  even  the  errors  of  the  man,  but 
of  his  administration ;  it  was  not  infallible,  I  humbly  presume. 

I  call  your  particular  attention  to  the  second  paragraph  ;  it 
runs  thus  : 

"  If  the  administration  of  the  Duke  of  Richmond  had  been  conducted 
with  more  than  ordinary  talent,  its  errors  might,  in  some  degree  have 
been  atoned  for  by  its  ability,  and  the  people  of  Ireland,  though  they 
might  have  much  to  regret,  yet  would  have  something  to  admire  ;  but 
truly,  after  the  gravest  consideration,  they  must  find  themselves  at  a  loss 
to  discover  any  striking  feature  in  his  Grace's  administration,  that  makes 
it  superior  to  the  worst  of  his  predecessors." 

The  Attorney-General  dwelt  much  upon  this  paragraph, 
gentlemen,  and  the  importance  which  he  attached  to  it  fur- 
nishes a  strong  illustration  of  his  own  consciousness  of  the 
weakness  of  his  case.  What  is  the  meaning  of  this  para- 
graph ?  I  appeal  to  you  whether  it  be  more  than  this — that 
there  has  been  nothing  admirable  in  his  administration — that 
there  has  not  been  much  ability  displayed  by  it.  So  far,  gen- 
tlemen, there  is,  indeed,  no  flattery,  but  still  less  of  libel,  un- 
less you  are  prepared  to  say,  that  to  withhold  praise  from  any 
administration  deserves  punishment. 

Is  it  an  indictable  offence  not  to  perceive  its  occult  talents  ? 
"Why,  if  it  be,  find  my  client  guilty  of  not  being  a  sycophant 
and  a  flatterer,  and  send  him  to  prison  for  two  years,  to  gratify 
the  Attorney-General,  who  tells  you  that  the  Duke  of  Rich- 
mond is  the  best  chief  governor  Ireland  ever  saw. 


74  SELECT   SPEECHES    OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

But  the  mischief,  I  am  told,  hes  in  the  art  of  the  sentence. 
Why,  all  that  it  says  is,  that  it  is  difficult  to  discover  the  strik- 
ing features  that  distinguish  this  from  bad  administrations.  It 
does  not,  gentlemen,  assert  that  no  such  striking  features  ex- 
ist, much  less,  does  it  assert  that  no  features  of  that  kind  exist, 
or  that  such  features,  although  not  striking,  are  not  easily  dis- 
cernible. So  that,  really,  you  are  here  again  required  to  con- 
vict a  man  for  not  flattering.  He  thinks  an  administration  un- 
talented  and  silly  ;  that  is  no  crime  ;  he  says,  it  has  not  been 
marked  with  talent  or  abiUty — that  it  has  no  striking  fea- 
tures ;  all  this  may  be  mistaken  and  false,  yet  there  is  nothing 
m  it  that  resembles  a  Crime. 

And,  gentlemen,  if  it  be  true — if  this  be  a  fooHsh  adminis- 
tration, can  it  be  an  offence  to  say  so?  If  it  has  had  no 
striking  features  to  distinguish  it  fi'om  bad  administrations,  can 
it  be  criminal  to  say  so  ?  Are  you  prepared  to  say,  that  not 
one  word  of  truth  can  be  told  under  no  less  a  penalty  than 
years  of  a  dungeon  and  heavy  fines  ? 

EecoUect,  that  the  Attorney-General  told  you  that  the  press 
was  the  protection  of  the  people  against  the  government. 
Good  Heaven  !  gentlemen,  how  can  it  protect  the  people 
against  the  government,  if  it  be  a  crime  to  say  of  that  govern- 
ment that  it  has  committed  errors,  displays  little  talent,  and 
has  no  striking  features  ?  Did  the  prosecutor  mock  you,  when 
he  talked  of  the  protection  the  press  alfforded  to  the  people  ? 
If  he  did  not  insult  you  by  the  admission  of  that  upon  which 
he  will  not  allow  you  to  act,  let  me  ask,  against  what  is  the 
press  to  protect  the  people  ?  When  do  the  people  want  pro- 
tection ? — when  the  government  is  engaged  in  dehnquencies, 
oppression,  and  crimes.  It  is  against  these  that  the  people 
want  the  protection  of  the  press.  Now,  I  put  it  to  your  plain 
sense,  whether  the  press  can  afford  such  protection,  if  it  be  pun- 
ished for  treating  of  these  crimes  ? 

Still  more,  can  a  shadow  of  j)rotection  be  given  by  a  press 
that  is  not  permitted  to  mention  the  errors,  the  talents,  and 
the  strildng  features  of  an  administration  ?  Here  is  a  watch- 
man admitted  by  the  Attorney-General  to  be  at  his  post  to 
warn  the  people  of  their  danger,  and  the  first  thing  that  is 
done  to  this  watchman  is  to  knock  him  down  and  bring  him  to 


SPEECH   IN   DEFENCE   OF  JOHN  MAGEE.  75 

a  dungeon  for  announcing  the  danger  he  is  bound  to  disclose. 
I  agree  with  the  Attorney-General,  the  press  is  a  protection, 
but  it  is  not  in  its  silence  or  in  its  voice  of  flattery.  It  can 
protect  only  by  speaking  out  when  there  is  danger,  or  error, 
or  want  of  ability.  If  the  harshness  of  this  tone  be  com- 
plained of,  I  ask,  what  is  it  the  Attorney-General  would  have  ? 
Does  he  wish  that  this  protection  should  speak  so  as  not  to 
be  understood ;  or,  I  again  repeat  it,  does  he  mean  to  delude 
us  with  the  name  and  the  mockery  of  protection  ?  Upon  this 
ground,  I  defy  you  to  find  a  verdict  for  the  prosecutor,  with- 
out declaring  that  he  has  been  guilty  of  an  attempt  to  deceive, 
when  he  talked  of  the  protection  of  the  press  against  errors, 
ignorance,  and  incapacity,  which  it  is  not  to  dare  even  to 
name.  Gentlemen,  upon  this  second  paragraph,  I  am  en- 
titled to  your  verdict  upon  the  Attorney-General's  own  ad- 
mission. 

He,  indeed,  passed  on  to  the  next  sentence  with  an  air  of 
triumph,  ■s\ith  the  apparent  certainty  of  its  producing  a  con- 
viction ;  I  meet  him  upon  it — I  read  it  boldly — I  will  discuss 
it  with  you  manfully — it  is  this  : 

"  They  insulted,  they  oppressed,  they  murdered,  and  they  deceived." 

The  Attorney-General  told  us,  rather  ludicrously,  that 
"  They,"  meaning  the  Duke's  predecessors,  included,  of  course, 
himseK.  How  a  man  could  be  included  amongst  his  predeces- 
sors, it  would  be  difficult  to  discover.  It  seems  to  be  that  mode 
of  expression  which  would  indicate  that  the  Attorney-General, 
notwithstanding  his  foreign  descent,  has  imbibed  some  of  the 
language  of  the  native  Irish.  But  our  blunders  arise  not,  like 
this,  from  a  confusion  of  ideas  ;  they  are  generally  caused  by 
too  great  condensation  of  thought ;  they  are,  indeed,  frequently 
of  the  head,  but  never — never  of  the  heart.  Woul,d  I  could 
say  so  much  for  the  Attorney-General ;  his  blunder  is  not  to 
be  attributed  to  his  cool  and  cautious  head  ;  it  sprung,  I  much 
fear,  from  the  misguided  bitterness  of  the  bigotry  of  his  heart. 

Well,  gentlemen,  this  sentence  does,  in  broad  and  distinct 
terms,  charge  the  predecessors  of  the  Duke,  but  not  the  Duke 
himself,  with  insult,  oppression,  murder,  and  deceit.  But  it  is 
history,  gentlemen  :  are  you  prepared  to  silence  the  voice  of 


76  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

history  ?  Are  you  disposed  to  suppress  the  recital  of  facts — 
the  story  of  the  events  of  former  days  ?  Is  the  historian,  and 
the  pubhsher  of  history,  to  be  exposed  to  indictment  and  pun- 
ishment ? 

Let  me  read  for  you  two  passages  from  Doctor  Leland's 
History  of  Ireland.  I  choose  a  remote  period  to  avoid  shock- 
ing your  prejudices,  by  the  recital  of  the  more  modern  crimes 
of  the  faction  to  which  most  of  you  belong.  Attend  to  this 
passage,  gentlemen. 

"Anno  1574. — A  solemn  peace  and  concord  was  made  between  the 
Earl  of  Essex  and  Eelim  O'Nial.  However,  at  a  feast,  wherein  the 
Earl  entertained  that  chieftain,  and  at  the  end  of  their  good  cheer, 
O'Nial,  with  his  wife,  were  seized  ;  their  friends,  who  attended,  were 
put  to  the  sword  before  their  faces.  Felim,  together  with  his  wife 
and  brother,  were  conveyed  to  Dublin,  where  they  were  cut  up  in 
quarters." 

How  would  you  have  this  fact  described  ?  In  what  lady- 
hke  terms  is  the  future  historian  to  mention  this  savage  and 
brutal  massacre?  Yet  Essex  was  an  English  nobleman — a 
predecessor  of  his  Grace ;  he  was  accomphshed,  gaUant,  and 
gay ;  the  envied  paramour  of  the  virgin  queen ;  and,  if  he 
afterwards  fell  on  the  scaffold,  one  of  the  race  of  the  ancient 
Irish  may  be  permitted  to  indulge  the  fond  superstition  that 
would  avenge  the  royal  blood  of  the  O'Nial  and  of  his  consort, 
on  theu'  perfidious  English  murderer. 

But  my  soul  fills  with  bitterness,  and  I  will  read  of  no  more 
Irish  murders.  I  turn,  however,  to  another  page,  and  I  will 
introduce  to  your  notice  another  predecessor  of  his  Grace  the 
Duke  of  Richmond.  It  is  Grey,  who,  after  the  recall  of  Es- 
sex, commanded  the  EngHsh  forces  in  Munster.  The  fort  of 
Smerwick,  in  Kerry,  surrendered  to  Grej  at  discretion.  It 
contained  some  Irish  troops,  and  more  than  700  Spaniards. 
The  historian  shaU  teU  you  the  rest : 

"That  mercy  for  which  they  sued  was  rigidly  denied  them.  Wing- 
field  was  commissioned  to  disarm  them,  and  when  this  service  was  per- 
formed, an  English  company  was  sent  into  the  fort. 

"The  Irish  rebels  found  they  were  reserved  for  execution  by  martial 
law. 

"  The  Italian  general  and  some  oflQcers  were  made  prisoners  of  war  ; 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE  OF  JOHN  MAGEE.  77 

but  tlie  garrison  was  butchered  in  cold  blood ;  nor  is  it  without  pain, 
that  we  find  a  service  so  horrid  and  detestable,  committed  to  Sir  Walter 
Ealeigh." 

"  The  garrison  was  butcliered  in  cold  blood,"  says  the  his- 
torian. Furnish  us,  Mr.  Attorney-General,  with  gentle  ac- 
cents and  sweet  words,  to  speak  of  this  savage  atrocity ;  or 
will  you  indict  the  author?  Alas!  he  is  dead,  full  of  years 
and  respect — as  faithful  an  historian  as  the  prejudices  of  his 
day  would  allow,  and  a  beneficed  clergyman  of  your  charch. 

Gentlemen  of  the  juiy,  what  is  the  mild  language  of  this 
paper  compared  with  the  indignant  language  of  history  ? 
Baleigh — the  ill-starred  Kaleigh — fell  a  victim  to  a  tyrant 
master,  a  corrupt  or  overawed  jury,  and  a  virulent  Attorney- 
General;  he  was  baited  at  the  bar  with  language  more  scurri- 
lous and  more  foul  than  that  you  heard  yesterday  poured  upon 
my  chent.  Yet,  what  atonement  to  ci^iKzation  could  his 
death  afford  for  the  horrors  I  have  mentioned  ? 

Decide,  now,  gentlemen,  between  those  hbels — ^between  that 
defamer's  history  and  my  client.  He  calls  those  predecessors 
of  his  Grace,  murderers.  History  has  left  the  living  records 
of  their  crimes  from  the  O'Nial,  treacherously  slaughtered,  to 
the  cruel  cold  butchery  of  the  defenceless  prisoners.  Until  I 
shall  see  the  publishers  of  Leland  and  of  Hume  brought  to 
your  bar,  I  defy  you  to  convict  my  chent. 

To  show  you  that  my  client  has  treated  these  predecessors 
of  his  Grace  with  gi-eat  lenity,  I  will  introduce  to  your  notice 
one,  and  only  one  more  of  them  ;  and  he,  too,  fell  on  the  scaf- 
fold— the  unfortunate  Strafford,  the  best  servant  a  despotic 
king  could  desire. 

Amongst  the  means  taken  to  raise  money  in  Ireland,  for 
James  the  Eirst,  and  his  son  Charles,  a  proceeding  called  "  a 
commission  to  inquire  into  defective  titles,"  was  invented.  It 
was  a  scheme,  gentlemen,  to  inquire  of  every  man  what  right 
he  had  to  his  own  property,  and  to  have  it  solemnly  and 
legally  determined  that  he  had  none.  To  effectuate  this 
scheme  required  great  management,  discretion,  and  integrity. 
First,  there  were  4,000  excellent  horse  raised  for  the  purpose 
of  being,  as  Strafford  himself  said,  "  good  lookers  on."  The 
rest  of  the  arrangement  I  would  recommend  to  modern  prac- 


78  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

tice ;  it  would  save  mucli  trouble.     I  wiU  shortly  abstract  it 
from  two  of  Strafford's  own  letters. 

The  oue  appears  to  have  been  written  by  him  to  the  Lord 
Treasurer;  it  is  dated  the  3d  December,  1634:.  He  begins 
with  an  apology  for  not  having  been  more  expeditious  in  this 
work  of  plunder,  for  his  employers  were,  it  seems,  impatient 
at  the  melancholy  waste  of  time.     He  then  says  : 

"Howbeit,  I  will  redeem  the  time  as  much  as  I  can,  with  such  as  may 
give  furtherance  to  the  king's  title,  and  will  inquire  out  fit  men  to  serve 
upon  the  juries." 

Take  notice  of  that,  gentlemen,  I  pray  you ;  perhaps  you 
thought  that  the  "  packing  of  juries  "  was  a  modern  invention 
— a  new  discovery.  You  see  how  greatly  mistaken  you  were  ; 
the  thing  has  example  and  precedent  to  support  it,  and  the 
authority  of  both  are,  in  our  law,  quite  conclusive. 

The  next  step  was  to  corrupt — oh,  no,  to  interest  the  wise 
and  learned  judges.  But  commentary  becomes  unnecessary, 
when  I  read  for  you  this  passage  from  a  letter  of  his  to  the 
king,  dated  the  9th  of  December,  1636 : 

"  Your  Majesty  was  graciously  pleased,  upon  my  humble  advice,  to 
bestow  four  shillings  in  the  pound  upon  your  Lord  Chief  Justice  and 
Lord  Chief  Baron  in  this  kingdom,  fourth  of  the  first  yearly  rent  raised 
upon  the  commission  of  defective  title,  which,  upon  observation,  I  find 
to  be  the  best  given  that  ever  was.  For  now  they  do  intend  it,  with  a 
care  and  diligence,  such  as  if  it  was  their  own  private,  and  most  certain 
gaining  to  themselves  ;  every  four  shilhugs  once  paid,  shall  better  your 
levenue  for  ever  after,  at  least  five  pounds." 

Thus,  gentlemen  of  the  jury,  aU  was  ready  for  the  mockery 
of  law  and  justice,  called  a  trial. 

Now  let  me  take  any  one  of  you ;  let  me  place  him  here, 
where  Mr.  Magee  stands  ;  let  him  have  his  j)roperty  at  stake ; 
let  it  be  of  less  value,  I  pray  you,  than  a  compensation  for  two 
years'  imprisonment ;  it  wiU,  however,  be  of  sufficient  value  to 
interest  and  rouse  aU  your  agony  and  anxiety.  If  you  were 
so  placed  here,  you  would  see  before  you  the  well-paid  At- 
torney-General, perhaps,  mahgnantly  delighted  to  pour  his 
rancor  upon  you ;  on  the  bench  would  sit  the  corrupt  and 
partisan  judge,  and  before  you,  on  that  seat  which  you  now 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE   OF  JOHN  MAGEE.  79 

occupy,  would  be  placed  the  packed  and  predetermined  jury. 
I  beg,  sir,  to  know  what  would  be  your  feelings,  your  honor, 
your  rage  ;  would  you  not  compare  the  Attorney-General  to 
the  gambler  wlio  played  with  a  loaded  die,  and  then  you 
would  hear  him  talk,  in  solemn  and  monotonous  tones,  of  his 
conscience !     Oh,  his  conscience,  gentlemen  of  the  jury ! 

But  the  times  are  altered.  The  press,  the  press,  gentlemen, 
has  effectuated  a  salutary  revolution ;  a  commission  of  de- 
fective titles  would  no  longer  be  tolerated  ;  the  judges  can  no 

longer  be  bribed  with  money,  and  juries  can  no  longer  be 

I  must  not  say  it.  Yes,  they  can,  you  know — ^we  all  know  they 
can  be  still  inquired  out,  and  "  packed,"  as  the  technical  phrase 
is.  But  you,  who  are  not  packed,  you,  who  have  been  fairly 
selected,  will  see  that  the  language  of  the  pubhcation  before 
us  is  mildness  itself,  compared  with  that  which  the  truth  of 
history  requu'es — compared  with  that  which  history  has  already 
used. 

I  proceed  with  this  alleged  hbel. 

The  next  sentence  is  this — 

"  The  profligate,  unprincipled  Westmoreland."  I  throw 
down  the  paper  and  address  myself  in  particular  to  some  of 
you.  There  are,  I  see,  amongst  you  some  of  our  JBible  dis- 
tributers, "  and  of  our  suppressors  of  vice."  Distributers  of 
Bibles,  suppressors  of  vice — what  call  you  profligacy  ?  What 
is  it  you  would  call  profligacy  ?  Suppose  the  peerage  was 
exposed  for  sale — set  up  at  open  auction — it  was  at  that  time 
a  judicial  office — suppose  that  its  price,  the  exact  price  of  this 
judicial  office,  was  accurately  ascertained  by  daily  experience 
— would  you  call  that  profligacy  ?  If  pensions  were  multiplied 
beyond  bounds  and  beyond  example — if  places  were  augment- 
ed until  invention  was  exhausted,  and  then  were  subdivided 
and  split  into  halves,  so  that  two  might  take  the  emoluments 
of  each,  and  no  person  do  the  duty — if  these  acts  were  resort- 
ed to  in  order  to  corrupt  your  representatives — would  you, 
gentle  suppressors  of  vice,  call  that  profligacy? 

If  the  father  of  children  selected  in  the  open  day  his  adul- 
terous paramour — if  the  wedded  mother  of  children  displayed 
her  crime  unblushingly — if  the  assent  of  the  titled  or  untitled 
wittol  to  his  own  shame  was  purchased  with   the  people's 


80  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF   DANIEL    O'CONNELL. 

money — if  this  scene — ^if  these  were  enacted  in  the  open  day, 
would  you  call  that  profligacy,  sweet  distributers  of  Bibles? 
The  women  of  Ireland  have  always  been  beauteous  to  a  pro- 
verb ;  they  were,  without  an  exception,  chaste  beyond  the 
terseness  of  a  proverb  to  express ;  they  are  still  as  chaste  as  in 
former  days,  but  the  depraved  example  of  a  depraved  court 
has  furnished  some  exceptions,  and  the  action  of  criminal  con- 
versation, before  the  time  of  Westmoreland  unknown,  has 
since  become  more  familiar  to  our  courts  of  justice. 

Call  you  the  sad  example  which  produced  those  exceptions 
— call  you  that  profligacy,  suppressors  of  vice  and  Bijale  dis- 
tributers ?  The  vices  of  the  poor  are  within  the  reach  of  con- 
trol ;  to  suppress  them,  you  can  call  in  aid  the  churchwarden 
and  the  constable ;  the  justice  of  the  peace  will  readily  aid 
you,  for  he  is  a  gentleman — the  Court  of  Sessions  will  punish 
those  vices  for  you  by  fine,  by  imprisonment,  and,  if  you  are 
urgent,  by  whipping.  But,  suppressors  of  vice,  who  shall  aid 
you  to  suppress  the  vices  of  the  great  ?  Are  you  sincere,  or 
are  you,  to  use  your  own  phraseology,  whitewashed  tombs — 
painted  charnel-houses  ?  Be  ye  hypocrites  ?  If  you  are  not 
— if  you  be  sincere — (and,  oh,  how  I  wish  that  you  were) — ^if 
you  be  sincere,  I  will  steadily  require  to  know  of  you,  what 
aid  you  expect,  to  suppress  the  vices  of  the  rich  and  great  ? 
"Who  will  assist  you  to  suppress  those  vices?  The  church- 
warden ! — why  he,  I  beheve,  handed  them  into  the  best  pew 
in  one  of  your  cathedrals,  that  they  might  lovingly  hear  Di- 
vine service  together.  The  constable ! — absurd.  The  justice 
of  the  peace  ! — no,  upon  his  honor.  As  to  the  Court  of  Ses- 
sions, you  cannot  expect  it  to  interfere;  and  my  lords  the 
judges  are  really  so  busy  at  the  assizes,  in  hurrying  the  grand 
juries  through  the  presentments,  that  there  is  no  leisure  to 
look  after  the  scandalous  faults  of  the  great.  Who,  then,  sin- 
cere and  candid  suppressors  of  vice,  can  aid  you?  The 
Press ;  the  Press  alone  talks  of  the  profligacy  of  the  great ; 
and,  at  least,  shames  into  decency  those  whom  it  may  fail  to 
correct.  The  Press  is  your,  but  your  only  assistant.  Go, 
then,  men  of  conscience,  men  of  religion — go,  then,  and  con- 
vict John  Magee,  because  he  published  that  Westmoreland 
was  profligate  and  unprincipled  as  a  lord  Ueuteuant — do,  con- 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE   OF  JOHN  MAGEE.  81 

I 

vict,  and  then  return  to  your  distribution  of  Bibles  and  to 
your  attacks  upon  the  recreations  of  the  poor,  under  the  name 
of  vices. 

Do,  convict  the  only  aid  which  virtue  has,  and  distribute 
your  Bibles  that  you  may  have  the  name  of  being  rehgious ; 
upon  your  sincerity  depends  my  chent's  prospect  of  a  verdict. 
Does  he  lean  upon  a  broken  reed  ? 

I  pass  on  from  the  sanctified  portion  of  the  jury  which  I 
have  latterly  addressed,  and  I  call  the  attention  of  you  all  to 
the  next  member  of  the  sentence — 

"  The  cold-hearted  and  cruel  Camden." 

Here  I  have  your  prejudices  all  armed  against  me.  In  the 
administration  of  Camden,  your  faction  was  cherished  and 
triumphant.  Will  you  prevent  him  to  be  called  cold  and 
cruel?  Alas!  to-day,  why  have  I  not  men  to  address  who 
would  listen  to  me  for  the  sake  of  impartial  justice !  But 
even  with  you  the  case  is  too  powerful  to  allow  me  to  despair. 

Well,  I  do  say,  "  the  cold  and  cruel  Camden."  Why,  on  one 
circuit,  during  his  administration,  there  were  one  hundred 
individuals  tried  before  one  judge ;  of  these  ninety-eight  were 
capitally  convicted,  and  ninety-seven  hanged !  I  understand 
one  escaped ;  but  he  was  a  soldier  who  murdered  a  peasant, 
or  something  of  that  trivial  nature — ninety-seven  victims  in 
one  circuit ! 

In  the  meantime,  it  was  necessary,  for  the  purposes  of  the 
Union,  that  the  flame  of  rebellion  should  be  fed.  The  meet- 
ings of  the  rebel  colonels  in  the  north  were,  for  a  length  of 
time,  regularly  reported  to  government ;  but  the  rebelUon  was 
not  then  ripe  enough ;  and  whilst  the  fruit  was  coming  to  ma- 
turity, under  the  fostering  hand  of  the  administration,  the 
wretched  dupes  atoned  on  the  gallows  for  allowing  themselves 
to  be  deceived. 

In  the  meantime  the  soldiery  were  turned  in  at  free  quar- 
ters amongst  the  wives  and  daughters  of  the  peasantry ! 

Have  you  heard  of  Abercrombie,  the  vahant  and  the  good 
— he  who,  mortally  wounded,  neglected  his  wound  until  vic- 
tory was  ascertained — he  who  allowed  his  Hfe's  stream  to  flow 
unnoticed  because  his  country's  battle  was  in  suspense — he 
who  died  the  martyr  of  victory — he  who  commenced  the  ca- 


82  SELECT   SPEECHES   OF    DANIEL  o'CONNELL. 

reer  of  glory  on  tlie  land,  and  taught  French  insolence,  tlia  n 
which  there  is  nothing  so  permanent — even  transplanted,  it 
exhibits  itself  to  the  third  and  fourth  generation — he  taught 
French  insolence,  that  the  British  and  Irish  soldier  was  as 
much  his  superior  by  land,  as  the  sailor  was  confessedly  by 
sea — he,  in  short,  who  commenced  that  career  which  has  since 
placed  the  Irish  Wellington  on  the  highest  pinnacle  of  glory. 
Abercrombie  and  Moore  were  in  Ireland  under  Camden. 
Moore,  too,  has  siace  fallen  at  the  moment  of  triumph — 
Moore,  the  best  of  sons,  of  brothers,  of  friends,  of  men — the 
soldier  and  the  scholar — the  soul  of  reason  and  the  heart  of 
pity — Moore  has,  in  documents  of  which  you  may  plead  igno- 
rance, left  his  opinions  upon  record  with  respect  to  the  cruelty 
of  Camden's  administration.  But  you  all  have  heard  of  Aber- 
crombie's  proclamation,  for  it  amounted  to  that ;  he  proclaimed 
that  cruelty  in  terms  the  most  unequivocal ;  he  stated  to  the 
soldiery  and  to  the  nation,  that  the  conduct  of -the  Camden  ad- 
ministration had  rendered  "  the  soldiery  formidable  to  all  but 
the  enemy." 

Was  there  no  cruelty  in  thus  degrading  the  British  soldier  ? 
And  say,  was  not  the  process  by  which  that  degradation  was 
effectuated  cruelty  ?  Do,  then,  contradict  Abercrombie,  upon 
your  oaths,  if  you  dare  ;  but,  by  doing  so,  it  is  not  my  client 
alone  you  will  convict — ^you  will  also  convict  yourselves  of  the 
foul  crime  of  perjury. 

I  now  come  to  the  third  branch  of  this  sentence  ;  and  here 
I  have  an  easy  task.  All,  gentlemen,  that  is  said  to  the  arti- 
ficer and  superintendent  of  the  Union  is  this — "  the  artful  and 
treacherous  Cornwalhs."  Is  it  necessary  to  prove  that  the 
Union  was  effectuated  by  artifice  and  treachery  ?  For  my 
part,  it  makes  my  blood  boil  when  I  think  of  the  unhappy  pe- 
riod which  was  contrived  and  seized  on  to  carry  it  into  effect ; 
one  year  sooner,  and  it  would  have  made  a  revolution — one 
year  later,  and  it  would  hare  been  for  ever  impossible  to  carry 
it.  The  moment  was  artfully  and  treacherously  seized  on, 
and  our  country,  that  was  a  nation  for  countless  ages,  has 
dwindled  into  a  province,  and  her  name  and  her  glory  are  ex- 
tinct for  ever. 

I  should  net  waste  a  moment  upon  this  part  of  the  case,  but 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE   OP  JOHN  MAGEE.  83 

that  tlie  gentlemen  at  the  other  side  who  opposed  that  meas- 
ure have  fm"nished  me  with  some  topics  which  I  may  not,  can- 
not omit.  Indeed  Mr.  Magee  deserves  no  verdict  from  any 
Irish  jury,  who  can  hesitate  to  think  that  the  contriver  of  the 
Union  is  treated  with  too  much  lenity  in  this  sentence ;  he 
fears  yoar  disapprobation  for  speaking  with  so  Httle  animosity 
of  the  artificer  of  the  Union. 

There  was  one  piece  of  treachery  committed  at  that  period, 
at  which  both  you  and  I  equally  rejoice ;  it  was  the  breach  of 
faith  towards  the  leading  Cathohcs ;  the  written  promises 
made  them  at  that  period  have  been  since  printed ;  I  rejoice 
with  you  that  they  were  not  fulfilled ;  when  the  Catholic 
trafficked  for  his  o^vn  advantage  upon  his  country's  miseries, 
he  deserved  to  be  deceived.  For  this  mockery,  I  thank  the 
ComwaUis  administration.  I  rejoice,  also,  that  my  first  intro- 
duction to  the  stage  of  pubhc  hfe,  was  in  the  opposition  to 
that  measure. 

In  humble  and  obscure  distance,  I  followed  the  footsteps  of 
my  present  adversaries.  What  their  sentiments  were  then  of 
the  authors  of  the  Union,  I  beg  to  read  to  you ;  I  will  read 
them  from  a  newspaper  set  up  for  the  mere  purpose  of  oppos- 
ing the  Union,  and  conducted  under  the  control  of  these  gen- 
tlemen. If  theu"  editor  should  be  gravely  denied,  I  shall  only 
reply — "  Oh,  cease  your  funning."* 

The  charge  of  being  a  Jacobin,  was  at  that  time  made 
against  the  present  Attorney-General — him,  plain  William 
Saurin — in  the  very  terms,  and  with  just  as  much  truth  as  he 
now  applies  it  to  my  client.  His  reply  shall  serve  for  that  of 
Mr.  Magee.  I  take  it  from  the  anti-Union  of  the  22nd  March, 
1800. 

"To  tlie  charge  of  Jacobin,  Mr.  Saurin  said  lie  knew  not  what  it 
meant,  as  apj)liecl  to  liim,  except  it  was  an  opposition  to  the  will  of 
the  British  minister." 

So  says  Mr.  Magee ;  but,  gentlemen,  my  eye  lights  upon  an- 
other passage  of  Mr.  Saurin's  in  the  same  speech  from  which 
I  have  quoted  the  above.     It  was  in  these  words  : 

*  A  pamphlet  full  of  wit  and  talent  under  this  title  was  pubUshed  by  the  So- 
licitor-General. » 


84  SELECT   SPEECHES   OF    DANIEL   o'COKXELL. 

"  Mr.  Saurin  admitted,  that  debates  might  sometimes  produce  agi- 
tations, but  that  was  the  price  necessai-ily  paid  for  Hberty." 

Oh,  how  I  thank  this  good  Jew  for  the  word.  Yes,  agita- 
tion is,  as  Mr.  Saurin  well  remarked,  the  price  necessarily  paid 
for  hberty.  We  have  paid  the  price,  gentlemen,  and  the  hon- 
est man  refuses  to  give  us  the  goods. 

Now,  gentlemen,  of  this  Mr.  Sauiin,  then  an  agitator,  I  beg 
leave  to  read  the  opinion  upon  this  Union,  the  author  of 
which  we  have  only  called  artful  and  treacherous.  From  this 
speech  of  the  13th  March,  1800, 1  select  these  passages  : 

"  Mr.  Sauriu  said  he  felt  it  his  duty  to  the  crown,  to  the  country,  and 
to  his  family,  to  warn  the  minister  of  the  dreadful  consequences  of  per- 
severing in  a  measure  which  the  people  of  Ireland  almost  unanimously 

disliked." 

And  again — 

"  He,  for  one,  would  assert  the  principles  of  the  glorious  revolution, 
and  boldly  declare  in  the  face  of  the  nation,  that  when  the  sovereign 
power  dissolved  the  compact  that  existed  between  the  government  and 
the  people,  that  moment  the  right  of  resistance  accrues. 

"  Whether  it  woiild  be  prudent  in  the  people  to  avail  themselves  of  that 
right  would  be  another  question.  But  if  a  legislative  union  were  forced 
on  the  country,  against  the  will  of  its  inhabitants,  it  would  be  a  nullity, 
and  resistance  to  it  would  be  a  struggle  against  usurpation,  and  not  a 
resistance  against  law." 

May  I  be  permitted  just  to  observe,  how  much  more  violent, 
this  agitator  of  the  year  1800,  than  we  poor  and  timid  agita- 
tors of  the  year  1813.  When  did  we  talk  of  resistance  being 
a  question  of  prudence  ?  Shame  upon  the  men  who  call  us 
intemperate,  and  yet  remember  their  own  violence. 

But,  gentlemen,  is  the  Attorney-General  at  hberty  to  change 
the  nature  of  things  with  his  own  official  and  professional 
prospects?  I  am  ready  to  admit  that  he  receives  thousands 
of  pounds  by  the  year  of  the  public  moneys,  in  his  office  of 
Attorney-General — thousands  from  the  Crown-Solicitor — thou- 
sands, for  doing  httle  work,  from  the  Custom-House ;  but 
does  all  this  pubhc  booty  with  which  he  is  loaded  alter  the 
nature  of  things,  or  prevent  that  from  being  a  deceitful 
measure,  brought  about  by  artful  and  treacherous  means, 
against  which  Mr.  Saurin,  in  1800,  preached  the  holy  doc- 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE   OF  JOHN   MAGEE.  85 

ti"ine  of  insurrection,  sounded  the  tocsin  of  resistance,  and 
summoned  the  people  of  the  land  to  battle  against  it,  as 
against  usurpation  ? 

In  1800,  he  absolves  the  subjects  from  their  allegiance — if 
the  usurpation,  styled  the  Union,  will  be  carried — and  he, 
this  identical  agitator,  in  1813,  indicts  a  man,  and  calls  him  a 
ruffian,  for  speaking  of  the  contrivers  of  the  Union,  not  as 
usm'pers,  but  as  artful,  treacherous  men.  Gentlemen,  pity  the 
situation  in  which  he  has  placed  himself;  and  praj,  do  not 
think  of  inflicting  punishment  upon  my  client  for  his  extreme 
moderation. 

It  has  been  coarsely  urged,  and  it  will,  I  know,  be  urged  in 
the  splendid  misrepresentations  with  which  the  Sohcitor-Gen- 
eral  can  so  well  distort  the  argument  he  is  unable  to  meet — it 
will,  I  know,  be  urged  by  him,  that  having  established  the 
right  to  use  this  last  paragraph — having  proved  that  the  pre- 
decessors of  the  Duke  were  oppressors  and  murderers,  and 
profligate,  and  treacherous,  that  the  Ubel  is  only  aggravated 
thereby,  as  the  first  paragraph  compares  and  combines  the 
Duke  of  Richmond  vdth  the  worst  of  his  predecessors. 

This  is  a  most  fallacious  assertion;  and  here  it  is  that  I 
could  wish  I  had  to  address  a  dispassionate  and  an  enlight- 
ened jury.  You  are  not,  you  know  you  are  not,  of  the  selec- 
tion of  my  client.  Had  he  the  poor  privilege  of  the  sheep- 
stealer,  there  are,  at  least,  ten  of  you  who  should  never  have 
been  on  his  jury.  But  the  jury  he  would  select  is  not  such  a 
jury  in  his  favor,  as  has  been  impanelled  against  him ;  he 
desires  no  favor ;  he  would  desire  only  that  the  most  respect- 
able and  unprejudiced  of  your  city  should  be  selected  for  his 
trial ;  his  only  ambition  would  be  perfect  impartiality  ;  he 
would  desire,  and  I  should  desire  for  him,  a  jury  whose  ver- 
dict of  conviction,  if  they  did  convict  him,  would  produce  a 
sense  of  error  and  a  feeling  more  painful  to  his  mind  of  being 
wrong  than  a  star-chamber  sentence. 

If  I  had  to  address  such  a  jury,  how  easily  could  I  show 
them  that  there  is  no  comparison — no  attempt  at  simihtude. 
On  the  contrary,  the  object  of  the  writer  is  clearly  to  make  a 
contrast.  Grey  murdered ;  but  he  was  an  able  statesman ;  his 
massacre  was  a  crime  in  itself,  but  eminently  useful  to  his  em- 


86  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  o'CONNELL. 

ployers ;  it  contributed  mainly  to  secure  the  forfeiture  of  the 
overgrown  territories  of  the  House  of  Desmond.  Essex  was  a 
murderer,  but  liis  extreme  of  vice  was  accompanied  by  great 
military  services ;  he  was  principally  instrumental  in  effectu- 
ating the  conquest  of  Ireland — even  his  crimes  served  the 
cause  of  his  royal  mistress,  and  the  territory  of  the  slaugh- 
tered O'Nial  became  shke  land ;  he  had  terrific  cruelty  to 
answer  for,  but  he  could  give  it  some  answer  in  the  splendor 
and  solidity  of  his  services.  So  of  Strafford — he  was  an 
eminent  oppressor,  but  he  was  also  eminently  useful  to  his 
royal  master. 

As  to  the  Duke  of  Richmond,  the  contrast  is  intended  to  be 
complete — he  has  neither  great  crimes  nor  great  virtues.  He 
did  not  murder,  like  Essex  and  Grey,  but  he  did  not  render 
any  splendid  services.  In  short,  his  administration  has  been 
directly  the  reverse  of  these.  It  has  been  marked  by  errors 
and  not  crimes.  It  has  not  displayed  talents  as  they  did ;  and 
it  has  no  striking  features  as  they  had.  Such  is  the  fair, 
the  rational,  and  the  just  construction  which  a  fair,  rational, 
and  just  jury  would  put  upon  it. 

Indeed,  the  Attorney-General  seems  to  feel  it  was  necessary 
for  him  to  resort  to  other  topics,  in  order  to  induce  you  to  con- 
vict upon  this  part  of  the  case.  He  tehs  you  that  this  is  the 
second  time  that  the  Duke  of  Kichmond  has  been  called  a 
murderer.  Gentlemen,  in  this  indictment  there  is  no  allega- 
tion that  the  Duke  is  styled  a  murderer  by  this  publication  ; 
if  there  had  been,  he  should  be  readily  acquitted,  even  for  the 
variance  ;  and  when  the  Attorney-General  resorts  to  Barry's 
case,  he  does  it  to  inflame  your  passions,  and  mislead  your  un- 
derstandings— and  then  what  has  the  Irish  Magazine  to  do 
with  this  trial  ? 

Walter  Cox,  with  his  Irish  Magazine,  is  as  good  a  Protestant 
as  the  king's  Attorney-General,  and  probably  quite  as  sincere 
in  the  profession  of  that  rehgion,  though  by  no  means  as  much 
disposed  to  persecute  those  who  differ  fi'om  him  in  religious 
belief.  Indeed,  if  he  were  a  persecutor  of  his  countrymen,  he 
would  not  be  where  he  is — in  prison  ;  he  would  j)robably  en- 
joy a  full  share  of  the  pubhc  plunder,  and  which  is  now  lav- 
ished on  the  stupid  journals  in  the  pay  of  the  Castle — fi'om  the 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE  OF  JOHN  MAGEE.  87 

versatile,  veual,  and  verbose  correspondent,  to  the  equally  dull 
and  corrupt  Dublin  Journal. 

It  is,  however,  not  true,  that  he  is  in  jail  because  he  pub- 
lished what  is  called  a  libel.  The  Attorney-General  talked 
■with  a  gloatiug  pleasure  of  the  miseries  poor  "Watty  Cox  en- 
dures in  jail — miseries  that  seem  to  give  poignancy  and  zest 
to  the  enjoyments  of  liis  prosecutor.  I  will  make  him  happy  ; 
let  him  return  from  this  court  to  his  luxm'ies,  and  when  he 
finds  himself  at  his  table,  surrounded  with  every  delicacy,  and 
every  profusion,  remember  that  his  prisoner  Walter  Cox  is 
starving.  I  envy  him  not  this  rehsh,  but  I  cannot  suffer  him 
to  mislead  you.  Cox  is  not  in  jail  because  he  published  a 
hbel ;  he  is  there  because  he  is  poor.  His  time  of  imprison- 
ment expired  last  February,  but  he  was  condemned  to  23ay  a 
fine  of  £300,  and  having  no  money,  he  has  since  remained  in 
jail  It  is  his  poverty,  therefore,  and  not  his  crime,  that  detains 
him  within  the  fangs  of  the  Attorney-General — if,  indeed,  there 
be  any  greater  crime  in  society  than  being  poor. 

And  next,  the  Attorney-General  makes  a  beautiful  eulogium 
on  Magna  Charta.  There  we  agree.  I  should  indeed  prefer 
seeing  the  principles  of  that  great  charter  called  into  practical 
effect,  to  hearing  any  palinode,  however  beautiful,  said  or  sung 
on  its  merits.  But  what  recommendation  can  Magna  Charta 
have  for  poor  Cox  ?  That  charter  of  hberty  expressly  pro- 
vides that  no  man  shall  be  fined  beyond  what  he  can  pay.  A 
very  simple  and  natui'al  provision  against  political  severity. 
But  Cox  is  fined  £300  w^hen  he  is  not  worth  a  single  shilling. 
He  appealed  to  this  court  for  rehef,  and  quotes  Magna  Charta. 
Your  lordship  was  not  pleased  to  give  him  any  rehef.  He 
applies  to  the  Court  of  Exchequer,  and  that  Court,  after 
hearing  the  Attorney-General  against  him,  finds  itself  unable 
to  give  any  relief ;  and,  after  all  this,  the  unfortunate  -man  is 
to  he  tantahzed  with  hearing  that  the  Attorney-General  con- 
trived to  couple  his  case  with  the  praise  of  the  great  charter 
of  liberty — a  most  unlucky  coincidence — almost  enough  to 
drive  him,  in  whose  person  that  charter  is  violated,  into  a 
state  of  insanity. 

Poor  Watty  Cox  is  a  coarse  fellow,  and,  I  think,  ho  would 
be  apt  to  reply  to  that  praise  in  tlie  profane  and  contemptuous 


88  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

rhyme  of  Cromwell ;  most  assuredly  he  has  no  reason  to  treat 
this  useless  law  with  great  reverence.  It  would,  indeed,  ap- 
pear as  if  the  j)rosecutor  eulogized  Magna  Charta  only  to  give 
more  brilliancy  to  his  triumph,  which  he  has  obtained  in  the 
person  of  poor  Cox  over  it. 

The  next  topic  of  the  Attorney-General's  triumphant  abuse 
was  the  book  entitled,  "  The  Statement  of  the  Penal  Laws."  He 
called  it  a  convicted  book.  He  exulted  that  the  publisher  was 
in  prison  ;  he  traduced  the  author,  and  he  distorted  and  mis- 
represented the  spirit  and  meaning  of  that  book.  As  to  the 
pubhsher,  he  is,  I  admit,  in  prison.  The  Attorney-General 
has  had  the  pleasure  of  tearing  a  respectable  citizen,  of  irre- 
proachable character  and  conduct,  from  his  wife  and  the  little 
children  who  were  rendered  comfortable  by  his  honest,  perse- 
vering industry,  and  he  has  immui'ed  him  in  a  dungeon.  I 
only  congratulate  him  on  his  victory. 

As  to  the  author,  he  is  just  the  reverse  of  what  the  Attor- 
ney-General would  wish  him  to  be ;  he  is  a  man  of  fortune  ; 
he  is  an  able  lawyer — a  professional  scholar— an  accomphshed 
gentleman — a  sincere  friend  to  his  country,  which  he  has  orna- 
mented and  served.  As  to  the  book,  it  is  really  ludicrous  to 
an  extreme  degree  of  comicality  to  caU  it  a  convicted  book. 
There  are  about  400  pages  in  the  work ;  it  contains  an  elabo- 
rate, unexaggerated,  and,  I  think,  softened  detail  of  the  laws 
which  aggrieve  the  Catholics  of  Ireland,  and  of  the  practical 
results  of  those  laws.  Such  a  system,  to  which  the  Attorney- 
General  is  wedded,  as  much  as  to  his  own  emolument,  must 
have  excited  no  small  share  of  irritation  in  his  mind.  It  pro- 
duced a  powerful  sensation  on  the  en  the  party  to  which  he 
belongs.  Abundant  attempts  were  made  to  answer  it :  they 
were  paid  for  out  of  the  public  money ;  they  totally  failed, 
and  yet  if  the  book  had  been  erroneous,  there  could  be  noth- 
ing easier  than  its  confutation. 

If  that  book  had  been  mistaken  in  matter  of  law,  or  exag- 
gerated in  matter  of  fact,  its  refutation  would  have  been  found, 
where  we  have  found  and  proved  its  perfect  accuracy,  in  the 
statute  book  and  in  the  daily  experience  of  every  individual  in 
Ireland.  Truth,  you  are  told  by  the  prosecutor,  is  no  defence 
in  case  of  hbel ;  but  certainly  this  book  was  much  the  more 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE   OF  JOHN  MAGEE.  89 

provoking  for  being  true ;  and  yet,  gentlemen,  with  the  most 
powerful  incentives  to  prosecute  this  book,  the  Attorney- 
General  has  been  compelled,  most  reluctantly,  to  spare  every 
word  of  the  400  pages  of  text  and  margin,  and  has  been  una- 
ble to  find  any  pretext  for  an  indictment,  save  in  a  paltry  note 
containing  eight  lines  and  a  half,  and  three  marks  of  admi- 
ration. 

My  lords,  I  address  your  lordships  particularly  on  the  three 
notes  of  admiration,  because  they  formed  a  prominent  ground 
in  your  lordsliip's  learned  argument,  when  you  decided  that 
the  passage  was  a  libel  per  se.  Yes,  gentlemen,  admire  again, 
I  pray  you,  the  soHdity  and  brilliancy  of  our  law,  in  which 
three  marks  of  admiration  are  of  wonderful  efficacy  in  send- 
ing a  man  to  prison.  But  with  the  exception  of  the  note  of 
eight  and  a  half  h'nes,  the  book  has  borne  the  severest  criti- 
cism of  fact  and  of  law.  It  has  defied,  and  continues  to  defy, 
the  present  Attorney-General  and  his  well-assorted  jui'ies  ; 
and,  as  to  the  note  which  he  indicted,  it  contained  only  a 
remark  on  the  execution  of  a  man  who,  whether  innocent  or 
guilty,  was  tried  in  such  a  manner,  that  a  gentleman  of  the 
Irish  bar,  his  counsel,  threw  up  his  brief  in  disgust ;  and  when 
the  judge  who  presided  at  the  trial  ordered  the  counsel  to  re- 
main and  defend  Barry,  that  counsel  swore,  in  this  court,  that 
he  rejected  the  judge's  mandate  with  contempt. 

What  a  mighty  triumph  was  the  conviction  proved  against 
this  note  on  Barry's  case !  And  may  one  be  permitted  mourn- 
fully to  ask,  whether  the  indignation,  which  might  have  pro- 
duced indiscretion  in  speaking  of  Barry's  fate,  was  a  very  cul- 
pable quahty  in  a  feeling  mind,  prone  to  detest  the  horrors 
with  which  human  blood  is  sometimes  shed  under  the  forms 
and  mockery  of  trial  ?  But  that  conviction,  although  it  wiU 
erase  the  note,  will  not  stay  the  demand  which  an  intelligent 
pubhc  make  for  this  valuable  work.  Abeady  have  two  valua- 
ble editions  of  it  been  sold,  and  a  tlihd  edition  is  loudly  called 
for,  and  about  to  appear. 

What,  in  the  meantime,  has  been  the  fate  of  the  answers  ?  I 
see  two  booksellers  amongst  you ;  they  will  tell  you  that  the 
answers  are  recollected  only  by  the  loss  they  have  produced 
to  them,  and  by  the  cumbering  of  their  shelves.     Such  is  the 


90  SELECT    SPEECHES   OF  DANIEL  o'CONNELL. 

result  of  the  loyal  triumpli  of  liis  Grace  the  Duke  of  Rich- 
mond's admiuistration.  -  May  such  in  every  age  be  the  fruits 
of  every  prosecutor  of  free  discussion,  and  of  the  assertion  of 
poHtical  truth  ! 

I  have  followed  the  Attorney-General  through  his  discus- 
sion upon  Walter  Cos,  and  "The  Statement  of  the  Penal 
Laws,"  without  being  able  exactly  to  conjecture  his  motives  for 
introducing  them.  As  to  Cox,  it  appears  to  be  the  mere  grati- 
fication of  his  delight  at  the  misery  to  which  that  unfortunate 
man  is  reduced.  As  to  "  the  book,"  I  can  only  conjecture  that 
his  wish  is  to  insinuate  to  you  that  the  author  of  "  the  book  " 
and  of  this  pubhcation  is  the  same.  If  that  were  his  design, 
it  may  be  enough  to  say,  that  he  has  not  proved  the  fact,  and, 
therefore,  in  fairness,  it  ought  not  at  all  to  influence  youi'  de- 
cision. I  go  further  and  tell  him,  that  the  fact  is  not  so  ;  that 
the  author  is  a  different  person ;  that  the  writer  of  this  alleged 
hbel  is  a  Protestant — a  man  of  fortune — a  man  of  that  rank 
and  estimation,  that  even  the  Attorney-General,  were  I  to  an- 
nounce his  name,  which  my  client  will  never  do,  or  suffer  his 
advocate  to  do,  that  name  would  extort  respect,  even  fi'om  the 
Attorney-General  himself. 

He  has,  in  his  usual  fashion,  calumniated  the  spirit  and 
object  of  "  The  Statement  of  the  Penal  Laws."  He  says  it 
imputes  murder  and  every  other  crime  to  jiersons  in  high  sta- 
tions, as  resulting  from  their  being  Protestants.  He  says  that 
it  attributes  to  the  Lord  Lieutenant  the  committing  mm'der 
on  a  Catholic,  because  he  himself  is  a  Protestant.  Gentlemen, 
I  wish  you  had  read  that  book ;  if  you  did,  it  would  be  quite 
unnecessary  for  me  to  contradict  those  assertions  of  the  Attor- 
ney-General. La  fact,  there  never  were  assertions  more  un- 
founded :  that  book  contains  nothing  that  could  warrant  his 
description  of  it ;  on  the  contrary,  the  book  seeks  to  establish 
this  position,  that  the  grievances  which  the  Lish  Cathohcs 
suffer,  are  not  attributable  to  the  Protestant  religion — that 
they  are  repugnant  to  the  spirit  of  that  religion,  and  are  attri- 
butable, simply  and  singly,  to  the  spirit  of  monopoly,  and  tone 
of  superiority,  generated  and  fostered  by  the  system  of  exclu- 
sion, upon  which  the  Penal  Code  rests. 

The  author  of  that  book  is  confessedly  a  Catholic;  yet  the 


SPEECH  IN   DEFENCE   OF  JOHN  MAGEE.  91 

book  states,  and  the  Attorney-General  heard  the  passage  twice 
read  in  this  court,  that  "  if  Eoman  CathoHcs  were  placed,  by 
unjust  laws,  in  the  situation  in  which  the  Irish  Protestants 
now  are  placed,  they  would  oppress  and  exclude  precisely  as 
the  Protestants  now  do."  In  short,  his  statement  and  rea- 
sonings are  founded  on  this,  that  it  is  unjust  to  give  any  reli- 
gion exclusive  political  advantages ;  because,  whatever  that 
rehgion  may  be,  the  result  will  necessarily  prove  oppressive 
and  insulting  towards  the  less  favored  sect.  He  arg-ues  not 
exclusively  against  any  particular  rehgion,  but  from  natural 
causes  operating  on  human  beings.  His  book  may  be  a  libel 
on  human  nature,  but  it  is  no  more  a  libel  on  the  Protestant 
than  on  the  Cathohc  rehgion.  It  draws  no  other  inference 
than  this,  that  Catholics  and  Protestants,  under  similar  cir- 
cumstances, would  act  precisely  in  the  same  way. 

Having  foUowed  the  prosecutor  through  this  weary  digres- 
sion, I  return  to  the  next  sentence  of  this  pubUcation.  Yet  I 
cannot — I  must  detain  you  stni  a  httle  longer  from  it,  AS'hilst  I 
supphcate  your  honest  indignation,  if  in  your  resentments 
there  be  aught  of  honesty,  against  the  mode  in  which  the  At- 
torney-General has  introduced  the  name  of  our  aged  and 
afflicted  sovereign.  He  says,  this  is  a  libel  on  the  king,  be- 
cause it  imputes  to  him  a  selection  of  improper  and  criminal 
chief  governors.  Gentlemen,  this  is  the  very  acme  of  servile 
doctrine.  It  is  the  most  unconstitutional  doctrine  that  could 
be  uttered :  it  supposes  that  the  sovereign  is  responsible  for 
the  acts  of  his  servants,  whilst  the  constitution  declares  that 
the  king  can  do  no  wrong,  and  that  even  for  his  personal  acts, 
his  servants  shall  be  personally  responsible.  Thus,  the  Attor- 
ney-General reverses  for  you  the  constitution  in  theory  ;  and, 
in  point  of  fact,  where  can  be  found,  in  this  pubhcation,  any, 
even  the  slightest  allusion  to  his  Majesty?  The  theory  is 
against  the  Attorney-General,  and  yet,  contrary  to  the  fact, 
and  against  the  theory,  he  seeks  to  enhst  another  prejudice  of 
yours  against  Mr.  Magee. 

Prejudice  did  I  call  it?  oh,  no!  it  is  no  prejudice;  that 
sentiment  which  combines  respect  with  affection  for  my  aged 
sovereign,  suffering  under  a  calamity  with  which  heaven  has 
wiUed  to  visit  him,  but  which  is  not  due  to  any  default  of  his. 


92  SELECT  SPEECHES  OP  DANIEL    O'CONNELL. 

There  never  was  a  sentiment  that  I  should  wish  to  see  more 
cherished — more  honored.  To  you  the  king  may  appear  an 
object  of  respect ;  to  his  Cathohc  subjects  he  is  one  of  vene- 
ration ;  to  them  he  has  been  a  bountiful  benefactor.  To  the 
utter  disregard  of  your  aldermen  of  Skinner's  Alley,  and  the 
more  pompous  magnates  of  William  street,  his  Majesty  pro- 
cured, at  his  earnest  sohcitation  from  parliament,  the  restora- 
tion of  much  of  our  hberties.  He  disregarded  your  anti-Po- 
pery petitions.  He  treated  with  calm  indifference  the  ebulli- 
tions of  your  bigotry ;  and  I  owe  to  him  that  I  have  the 
honor  of  standing  in  the  proud  situation  from  which  I  am 
able,  if  not  to  j)rotect  my  client,  at  least  to  pour  the  indignant 
torrent  of  my  discourse  against  his  enemies,  and  those  of  his 
country. 

The  publication  to  which  I  now  recall  you,  goes  to  describe 
the  effects  of  the  facts  which  I  have  shown  you  to  have  been 
drawn  from  the  undisputed  and  authentic  history  of  former 
times.  I  have,  I  hope,  convinced  you,  that  neither  Leland 
nor  Hume  could  have  been  indicted  for  stating  those  facts, 
and  it  would  be  a  very  strange  jDerversion  of  principle,  which 
would  allow  you  to  convict  Mr.  Magee  for  that  which  has 
been  stated  by  other  writers,  not  only  without  punishment,  but 
with  applause. 

That  part  of  the  paragraph  which  relates  to  the  present  day 
is  in  these  words  : 

"Since  that  period  tlie  complexion  of  tlie  times  has  changed — the 
country  has  advanced — it  has  outgrown  siibmission,  and  some  forms,  at 
least,  must  now  be  observed  towards  the  peoj)le." 

The  system,  however,  is  stUl  the  same ;  it  is  the  old  play 
with  new  decorations,  presented  in  an  age  somewhat  more  en- 
lightened ;  the  principle  of  government  remains  unaltered — a 
principle  of  exclusion  which  debars  the  majority  of  the  peo- 
ple from  the  enjoyment  of  those  privileges  that  are  possessed 
by  the  minority,  and  which  must,  therefore,  maintain  itself  by 
all  those  measures  necessary  for  a  government  founded  on 
injustice. 

The  prosecutor  insists  that  this  is  the  most  libellous  part  of 
the  entire  pubhcation.      I   am  glad  he  does  so ;    because  if 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE  OF  JOHN  MAGEE.  93 

there  be  amongst  you  a  single  particle  of  discrimination,  you 
cannot  fail  to  perceive  that  this  is  not  a  hbel — that  this  para- 
graph cannot  constitute  any  crime.  It  states  that  the  present 
is  a  system  of  exclusion.  Surely,  it  is  no  crime  to  say  so  ;  it 
is  what  you  all  say.  It  is  what  the  Attorney-General  himself 
gloried  iii:  This  is,  said  he,  exclusively  a  Protestant  govern- 
ment. Mr.  Magee  and  he  are  agreed.  Mr.  Magee  adds, 
that  a  principle  of  exclusion,  on  account  of  rehgion,  is  found- 
ed on  injustice.  Gentlemen,  if  a  Protestant  were  to  be  ex- 
cluded from  any  temporal  advantages  upon  the  score  of  his 
rehgion,  would  not  you  say  that  the  principle  upon  which  he 
was  excluded  w^as  unjust  ?  That  is  precisely  what  Mr.  Magee 
says ;  for  the  principle  which  excludes  the  Catholic  in  Ire- 
land, would  exclude  the  Protestant  in  Spain  and  in  Portugal, 
and  there  you  clearly  admit  its  injustice.  So  that,  really,  you 
would  condemn  yourselves,  and  your  own  opinions,  and  the 
right  to  be  a  Protestant  in  Spain  and  Portugal,  if  you  con- 
demn this  sentiment. 

But  I  would  have  you  further  observe  that  this  is  no  more 
than  the  discussion  of  an  abstract  principle  of  government ;  it 
arraigns  not  the  conduct  of  any  individual,  or  of  any  adminis- 
tration ;  it  only  discusses  and  decides  upon  the  moral  fitness 
of  a  certain  theory,  on  which  the  management  of  the  affahs  of 
Ireland  has  been  conducted.  If  this  be  a  crime,  we  are  all 
criminals ;  for  this  question,  whether  it  be  just  or  not  to  ex- 
clude from  power  and  office  a  class  of  the  people  for  religion, 
is  the  subject  of  daily — of  hourly  discussion.  The  Attorney- 
General  says  it  is  quite  just ;  I  proclaim  it  to  be  unjust — ob- 
viously unjust.  At  aU  public  meetings,  in  all  private  companies, 
this  point  is  decided  in  different  ways,  according  to  the  tem- 
per and  the  interest  of  individuals.  Indeed,  it  is  but  too  much 
the  topic  of  every  man's  discourse  ;  and  the  jails  and  the  bar- 
racks of  the  country  would  not  contain  the  hundredth  part  of 
those  whom  the  Attorney-General  would  have  to  crowd  into 
them,  if  it  be  penal  to  call  the  principle  of  exclusion  unjust. 
In  this  court,  without  the  least  danger  of  interruption  or  re- 
proof, I  proclaim  the  injustice  of  that  principle. 

I  will  then  ask  whether  it  be  lawful  to  print  that  which  it  is 
not  unlawful  to  proclaim  in  the  face  of  a  court  of  justice  ?  And 


94  SELECT   SPEECHES    OF  DANIEL   O'CONNELL. 

above  all,  I  will  ask  whether  it  can  be  criminal  to  discuss  tho 
abstract  principles  of  government  ?  Is  the  theory  of  the  law  a 
prohibited  subject  ?  I  had  understood  that  there  was  no  right 
so  clear  and  undoubted  as  that  of  discussing  abstract  and 
theoretic  principles,  and  their  apphcability  to  practicable  pur- 
poses. For  the  first  time  do  I  hear  this  disputed  ;  and  now 
see  what  it  is  the  Attorney-General  prohibits.  He  insists  upon 
punishing  Mr.  Magee ;  first,  because  he  accuses  his  adminis- 
tration of  "  errors  ;"  secondly,  because  he  charges  them  with 
not  being  distinguished  for  "  talents  ;"  thirdly,  because  he  can- 
not discover  thek  "  striking  features  ;"  and  fourthly,  because 
he  discusses  an  "  abstract  principle  !" 

This  is  quite  intelligible — this  is  quite  tangible.  I  begin  to 
understand  what  the  Attorney-General  means  by  the  Hberty  of 
the  Press  ;  it  means  a  prohibition  of  printing  anything  except 
praise,  respecting  "the  errors,  the  talents,  or  the  striking  fea- 
tures "  of  any  administration,  and  of  discussing  any  abstract 
principle  of  government.  Thus  the  forbidden  subjects  are  er- 
rors, talents,  striking  features,  and  principles.  Neither  the 
theory  of  the  government  nor  its  practices  are  to  be  discussed  ; 
you  may,  indeed,  praise  them ;  you  may  call  the  Attorney- 
General  "  the  best  and  wisest  of  men  ;"  you  may  call  his  lord- 
ship the  most  learned  and  impartial  of  all  possible  chief  justices ; 
you  may,  if  you  have  powers  of  visage  sufficient,  caU  the  Lord 
Lieutenant  the  best  of  all  imaginable  governors.  That,  gen- 
tlemen, is  the  boasted  hberty  of  the  press — the  liberty  that  ex- 
ists in  Constantinople — the  liberty  of  applying  the  most  ful- 
some and  unfounded  flattery,  but  not  one  word  of  censure  or 
reproof. 

Here  is  an  idol  worthy  of  the  veneration  of  the  Attorney- 
General.  Yes ;  he  talked  of  his  veneration  for  the  liberty  of 
the  press  ;  he  also  talked  of  its  being  a  protection  to  the  peo- 
ple against  the  government.  Protection  !  not  against  errors — 
not  against  the  want  of  talents  or  striking  features — nor 
against  the  efibrt  of  any  unjust  principle — protection  !  against 
Avhat  is  it  to  protect  ?  Did  he  not  mock  you  ?  Did  he  not 
plainly  and  palpably  delude  you,  when  he  talked  of  the  protec- 
tion of  the  press  ?  Yes.  To  his  inconsistencies  and  contra- 
dictions he  calls  on  you  to  sacrifice  your  consciences  ;  and  be- 


SPEECH   IN  DEFENCE   OP  JOHN  MAGEE.  95 

cause  you  are  no-Popery  men,  and  distributers  of  Bibles,  and 
aldermen  of  Skinner's  Alley,  and  Protestant  petitioners,  he  re- 
quires of  you  to  brand  yoiu'  souls  with  perjury.  You  cannot 
escape  it ;  it  is,  it  must  be  perjury  to  find  a  verdict  for  a  man 
who  gravely  admits  that  the  liberty  of  the  press  is  recognized 
by  law,  and  that  it  is  a  venerable  object,  and  yet  calls  for 
your  verdict  upon  the  ground  that  there  is  no  such  thing  in  ex- 
istence as  that  which  he  has  admitted,  that  the  law  recognizes, 
and  that  he  himself  venerates. 

Clinging  to  the  fond  but  faint  hope  that  you  are  not  capa- 
ble of  sanctioning,  by  your  oaths,  so  monstrous  an  inconsis- 
tency, I  lead  you  to  the  next  sentence  upon  this  record. 

"  Although  his  Grace  does  not  apj)ear  to  know  what  are  the  quali- 
ties necessary  for  a  judge  in  Canada,  or  for  an  aid-de-camp  in  waiting 
at  a  court,  he  surely  cannot  be  ignorant  of  what  are  requisites  for  a  lord 
Heutenant." 

This  appears  to  be  a  very  innocent  sentence ;  yet  the  Attor- 
ney-General, the  venerator  of  that  protection  of  the  people 
against  a  bad  government — the  Hberty  of  the  press — tells  you 
that  it  is  a  gross  hbel  to  impute  so  much  ignorance  to  his 
Grace.  As  to  the  aid-de-camp,  gentlemen,  whether  he  be  se- 
letad  for  the  brilliancy  of  his  spurs,  the  pohsh  of  his  boots,  or 
the  precise  angle  of  his  cocked  hat,  are  grave  considerations 
which  I  refer  to  you.  Decide  upon  these  atrocities,  I  pray  you. 
But  as  to  the  judge  in  Canada,  it  cannot  be  any  reproach  to 
his. Grace  to  be  ignorant  of  his  qualifications.  The  old  French 
law  prevails  in  Canada,  and  there  is  not  a  lawyer  at  the  Ii'ish 
bar,  except,  perha]3S,  the  Attorney-General,  who  is  sufficiently 
acquainted  with  that  law  to  know  how  far  any  man  may  be  fit 
for  the  station  of  judge  in  Canada. 

If  this  be  an  ignorance  without  reproach  in.  Irish  lawyers, 
and  if  there  be  any  reproach  in  it,  I  feel  it  not,  whilst  I  avow 
that  ignorance — yet,  surely  it  is  absurd  to  torture  it  into  a 
calumny  against  the  Lord  Lieutenant — a  military  man,  and  no 
lawyer.  I  doubt  whether  it  would  be  a  libel  if  my  client  had 
said,  that  his  Grace  was  ignorant  of  the  quahties  necessary 
for  a  judge  in  Ireland — for  a  chief  judge,  my  lord.  He  has 
not  said  so,  however,  gentlemen,  and  true  or  false,  that  is  not 


96  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DAXIEL   O'CONNELL. 

now  the  question  under  consideration.  We  are  in  Canada  at 
present,  gentlemen,  in  a  ludicrous  search  for  a  libel  in  a  sen  - 
tence  of  no  great  point  or  raeaning.  If  you  are  sapient  enough 
to  suspect  that  it  contains  a  hbel,  your  doubt  can  only  arise 
from  not  comprehending  it ;  and  that,  I  own,  is  a  doubt  diffi- 
cult to  remove.  But  I  mock  you  when  I  talk  of  this  insig- 
nificant sentence. 

I  shall  read  the  next  paragraph  at  full  length.  It  is  con- 
nected with  the  Canadian  sentence  : 

"  Therefore,  vrere  an  appeal  to  be  made  to  him  in  a  dispassionate  and 
sober  moment,  we  might  candidly  confess  that  the  Ii'ish  would  not  be 
disappointed  in  their  hopes  of  a  successor,  though  they  would  behold 
the  same  smiles,  experience  the  same  sincerity,  and  witness  the  same 
disposition  towards  conciliation. 

"What,  though  they  were  deceived  in  1795,  and  found  the  mildness  of 
a  Fitzwilham  a  false  omen  of  concord  ;  though  they  were  duped  in  1800, 
and  found  that  the  privileges  of  the  Cathohcs  did  not  follow  the  extinc- 
tion of  the  parliament,  yet,  at  his  deiDarture,  he  wiU,  no  doubt,  state 
good  grounds  for  future  expectation ;  that  his  administration  was  not 
the  time  for  Emancipation,  but  that  the  season  is  fast  approaching  ;  that 
there  were  'existing  cii'cumstances, '  but  that  now  the  people  may  rely 
upon  the  virtues  even  of  an  hereditary  Prince  ;  that  they  should  continue 
to  worship  the  false  idol ;  that  their  ci'ies  must,  at  least,  be  heard  ;  and 
that,  if  he  has  not  compUed,  it  is  only  because  he  has  not  spoken.  In 
short,  his  Grace  will  in  no  way  vary  from  the  uniform  conduct  observed 
by  most  of  his  predecessors,  first  preaching  to  the  confidence  of  the 
people,  then  playing  upon  their  credulity. 

"He  came  over  ignorant — he  soon  became  prejudiced,  and  then  he 
became  intemperate.  He  takes  from  the  people  their  money  ;  he  eats 
of  then-  bread,  and  drinks  of  their  wine  ;  in  return,  he  gives  them  a  bad 
government,  and,  at  his  departure,  leaves  them  more  distracted  than 
ever.  His  Grace  commenced  his  reign  by  flattery,  he  continued  it  in 
folly,  he  accompanied  it  with  violence,  and  he  wiU  conclude  it  with 
falsehood." 

There  is  one  part  of  this  sentence,  for  which  I  most  respect- 
fully solicit  your  indulgence  and  pardon.  Be  not  exasperated 
•^dth  us  for  talking  of  the  mildness  of  Lord  Fitzwilliam,  or  of 
his  administration.  But,  notwithstanding  the  violence  any 
praise  of  him  has  excited  amongst  you,  come  dispassionately,  I 
pray  you,  to  the  consideration  of  the  paragraph.  Let  us  ab- 
stract the  meaning  of  it  fi'om  the  superfluous  words.     It  cer- 


SPEECH  IN   DEFENCE   OF  JOHN   MAGEE.  97 

tainly  does  tell  you,  that  his  Grace  came  over  ignorant  of  Irish 
affairs,  and  he  acquired  prejudices  upon  those  subjects,  and  ho 
has  become  intemperate.  Let  us  discuss  this  part  sepa- 
rately from  the  other  matter  suggested  by  the  paragraph  in 
question.  That  the  Duke  of  Richmond  came  over  to  Ireland 
ignorant  of  the  details  of  our  domestic  policy  cannot  be  mat- 
ter either  of  surprise  or  of  any  reproach.  A  military  man  en- 
gaged in  these  pursuits  which  otherwise  occupy  persons  of 
his  rank,  altogether  unconnected  with  Ireland,  he  could  not 
have  had  any  inducement  to  make  himself  acquainted  with 
the  details  of  our  barbarous  wrongs,  of  our  senseless  party 
quarrels,  and  criminal  feuds ;  he  was  not  stimulated  to  examine 
them  by  any  interest,  nor  could  any  man  be  attracted  to  study 
them  by  taste.  It  is,  therefore,  no  censure  to  talk  of  his  igno- 
rance— of  that  with  which  it  would  be  absurd  to  expect  that 
he  should  be  acquainted ;  and  the  knowledge  of  which  would 
neither  have  served,  nor  exalted,  nor  amused  him. 

Then,  gentlemen,  it  is  said  he  became  "  prejudiced."  Preju- 
diced may  sound  harsh  in  your  ears  ;  but  you  are  not,  at  least 
you  ought  not,  to  decide  upon  the  sound — ^it  is  the  sense  of 
the  word  that  should  determine  you.  Now  what  is  the  sense 
of  the  word  "  prejudice  "  here  ?  It  means  the  having  adopted 
precisely  the  opinions  which  every  one  of  you  entertain.  By 
"prejudice"  the  writer  means,  and  can  mean,  nothing  but 
such  sentiments  as  you  cherish.  When  he  talks  of  prejudice, 
he  intends  to  convey  the  idea  that  the  Duke  took  up  the  opi- 
nion, that  the  few  ought  to  govern  the  many  in  Ireland  ;  that 
there  ought  to  be  a  favored  and  an  excluded  class  in  Ireland  ; 
that  the  burdens  of  the  state  ought  to  be  shared  equally,  but  its 
benefits  conferred  on  a  few.  Such  are  the  ideas  conveyed  by 
the  word  prejudice ;  and  I  fearlessly  ask  you,  is  it  a  crime  to 
impute  to  his  Grace  these  notions  which  you  yourselves  enter- 
tain ?  Is  he  calumniated — is  he  hbelled,  when  he  is  charged 
with  concurring  with  you,  gentlemen  of  the  jury  ?  Will  you, 
by  a  verdict  of  conviction,  stamp  your  own  pohtical  sentiments 
with  the  seal  of  reprobation  ?  If  you  convict  my  client,  you 
do  this  :  you  decide  that  it  is  a  libel  to  charge  any  man  with 
those  doctrines  which  are  so  useful  to  you  individually,  and 
of  which  you  boast ;  or,  you  think  the  opinions  just,  and  yet 


98  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'COXXELL. 

that  it  is  criminal  to  charge  a  man  with  those  just  opinions. 
For  the  sake,  therefore,  of  consistency,  and  as  an  approval 
of  your  own  opinions,  I  call  on  you  for  a  verdict  of  acquittal. 

I  need  not  detain  you  long  on  the  expression  "  intemper- 
ate ;"  it  does  not  mean  any  charge  of  excess  of  indulgence  in 
any  enjoyment ;  it  is  not,  as  the  Attorney-General  suggested, 
an  accusation  of  indulging  beyond  due  bounds  in  the  pleasui'es 
of  the  table,  or  of  the  bottle ;  it  does  not  allude,  as  the  Attor- 
ney-General says,  to  midnight  orgies,  or  to  morning  revels.  I 
admit — I  fi*eely  admit — that  an  allusion  of  that  kind  would 
savor  of  libel,  as  it  would  certainly  be  unnecessary  for  any 
purpose  of  political  discussion.  But  the  intemperance  here 
spoken  of  is  mere  pohtical  intemperance  ;  it  is  that  vio- 
lence which  every  man  of  a  fervid  disposition  feels  in  support 
of  his  political  opinions.  Nay,  the  more  pure  and  honest  any 
man  may  be  in  the  adoption  of  his  opinions,  the  more  likely, 
and  the  more  justifiable  will  he  be  in  that  ardent  support  of 
them,  which  goes  by  the  name  of  intemperance. 

In  short,  although  pohtical  intemperance  cannot  be  deemed 
by  cold  calculators  as  a  virtue,  yet  it  has  its  som'ce  in  the 
purest  virtues  of  the  human  heart,  and  it  frequently  produces 
the  greatest  advantages  to  the  public.  How  would  it  be  pos- 
sible to  overcome  the  many  obstacles  which  self-interest,  and 
ignorance,  and  passion  throw  in  the  way  of  improvement,  with- 
out some  of  that  ardor  of  temper  and  disposition  which  grave 
men  call  intemperance?  And,  gentlemen,  are  not  your  opinions 
as  deserving  of  warm  support  as  the  opinion  of  other  men ; 
or  do  you  feel  any  inherent  depravity  in  the  political  senti- 
ments which  the  Duke  of  Richmond  has  adopted  from  you, 
that  would  render  him  depraved  or  degraded  by  any  A-iolence 
in  their  support?  You  have  no  alternative.  If  you  convict 
my  chent,  you  condemn,  upon  your  oaths,  your  own  pohtical 
creed ;  and  declare  it  to  be  a  hbel  to  charge  any  man  with 
energy  in  your  cause. 

If  you  are  not  disposed  to  go  this  length  of  political  incon- 
sistency, and  if  you  have  determined  to  avoid  the  religious 
inconsistency  of  perjuring  yourselves  for  the  good  and  glory 
of  the  Protestant  religion,  do,  I  pray  you,  examine  the  rest 
of  this  paragraph,  and  see  whether  you   can,  by   any  ingo- 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE  OF  JOHN  MAGEE.  99 

nuity,  detect  that  nondescript,  a  libel,  in  it.  It  states  in  sub- 
stance tliis  :  that  this  administration,  treading  in  the  steps  of 
former  administrations,  preached  to  the  confidence  of  the  peo- 
ple, and  played  on  theu'  credulity;  and  that  it  will  end,  as 
those  administrations  have  done,  in  some  flattering  prophecy, 
paying  present  disappointment  with  the  coinage  of  delusive 
hope.  That  this  administration  commenced,  as  usual,  with 
preaching  to  the  confidence  of  the  people,  was  neither  crimi- 
nal in  the  fact,  nor  can  it  be  unpleasant  in  the  recital. 

It  is  the  immemorial  usage  of  all  administrations  and  of  all 
stations,  to  commence  with  those  civil  professions  of  future 
excellence  of  conduct  which  are  called,  and  not  unaptly, 
"preaching  to  the  confidence  of  the  people."  The  very 
actors  are  generally  sincere  at  this  stage  of  the  political 
farce ;  and  it  is  not  insinuated  that  this  administration  was 
not  as  candid  on  this  subject  as  the  best  of  its  predecessors. 
The  placing  on  the  creduhty  of  the  people  is  the  ordinary- 
state  trick.  You  recollect  how  angry  many  of  you  were  with 
his  Grace  for  his  Munster  tour,  shortly  after  his  arrival  here. 
You  recoUect  how  he  checked  the  Mayor  of  Cork  for  propos- 
ing the  new  favorite  Orange  toast;  what  liberaHty  he  dis- 
played to  Popish  traders  and  bankers  in  Limerick;  and 
how  he  returned  to  the  capital,  leaving  behind  him  the  im- 
pression that  the  no-Popery  men  had  been  mistaken  in  their 
choice,  and  that  the  Duke  of  Richmond  was  the  enemy  of 
every  bigotry — the  friend  to  eveiy  Hberahty!  Was  he  sin- 
cere, gentlemen  of  the  jury,  or  was  this  one  of  those  innocent 
devices  which  are  called — playing  on  the  people's  creduhty? 
Was  he  sincere  ?  Ask  liis  subsequent  conduct.  Have  there 
been  since  that  time  any  other  or  different  toasts  cheered  in 
his  presence?  Has  the  name  of  Ireland  and  of  Irishmen 
been  profaned  by  becoming  the  sport  of  the  warmth  excited 
by  the  accompaniment  to  these  toasts  ?  Some  individuals  of 
you  could  inform  me.  I  see  another  dignitary  of  your  cor- 
poration here  [said  Mr.  O'Connell,  turning  roimd  pointedly  to 
the  lord  mayor] — I  see  a  civic  dignitary  here,  who  could  tell 
of  the  toasts  of  these  days  or  nights,  and  would  not  be  at  a 
loss  to  apply  the  right  name — if  he  were  not  too  prudent  as 
well  as  too  polite  to  do  so — to  that  innocent  affectation  of  lib- 


100  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

erality  wliicli  distinguislied  his  Grace's  visit  to  the  soutli  of 
IrelancL  It  was,  indeed,  a  play  upon  our  credulity,  but  it  can 
be  no  libel  to  speak  of  it  as  sucli;  for  see  the  situation  in 
which  you  would  place  his  Grace  ;  you  know  he  affected  con- 
ciliation and  perfect  neutrality  between  our  parties  at  first ;  you 
know  he  has  since  taken  a  marked  and  decided  part  with  you. 

Surely  you  are  not  disposed  to  call  this  a  crime,  as  it  were, 
to  convict  his  Grace  of  duphcity,  and  of  a  vile  hypocrisy.  No, 
gentlemen,  I  entreat  of  you  not  to  calumniate  the  Duke ;  call 
this  conduct  a  mere  play  on  the  credulity  of  a  people  easily 
deceived — innocent  in  its  intention,  and  equally  void  of  guilt 
in  its  description.  Do  not  attach  to  those  words  a  meaning 
which  would  prove  that  you  yourselves  condemned,  not  so 
much  the  writer  of  them,  as  the  man  who  gave  color  and  coun- 
tenance to  this  assertion.  Besides,  gentlemen,  what  is  your 
liberty  of  the  press  worth,  if  it  be  worthy  of  a  dungeon  to 
assert  that  the  pubHc  creduhty  has  been  played  upon  ?  The 
liberty  of  the  press  would  be  less  than  a  dream,  a  shadow,  if 
every  such  phrase  be  a  hbel. 

But  the  Attorney-General  triumphantly  tells  you  that  there 
must  be  a  Hbel  in  this  paragraph,  because  it  ends  with  a 
charge  of  falsehood.  May  I  ask  you  to  take  the  entn-e  para- 
graph together  ?  Common  sense  and  your  duty  require  you 
to  do  so.  You  will  then  perceive  that  this  charge  of  falsehood 
is  no  more  than  an  opinion,  that  the  administration  of  the 
Duke  of  Richmond  will  terminate  precisely  as  that  of  many  of 
his  predecessors  has  done,  by  an  excuse  for  the  past — a  flat- 
tering and  fallacious  promise  for  the  future.  Why,  you  must 
all  of  you  have  seen,  a  short  time  since,  an  account  of  a  pub- 
lic dinner  in  London,  given  by  persons  styling  themselves 
"  Friends  to  Behgious  Liberty."  At  that  dinner,  at  which 
two  of  the  Eoyal  Dukes  attended,  there  were,  I  think,  no  less 
than  four  or  five  noblemen  who  had  filled  the  office  of  lord 
lieutenant  of  Ireland.  Gentlemen,  at  this  dinner,  they  were 
ardent  in  their  professions  of  kindness  towards  the  Cathohcs 
of  Ireland,  in  their  declarations  of  the  obvious  policy  and  jus- 
tice of  conciliation  and  concession,  and  they  bore  ample  testi- 
mony to  our  sufferings  and  our  merits.  But  I  appeal  from 
their  present  declarations  to  their  past  conduct ;  they  are  now 


O'COXNELL'S  MONUMENT, 
In  Glasnevm  Cemetery. 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE   OF  JOHN  MAGEE.  101 

full  of  liberality  and  justice  to  us ;  yet,  I  speak  only  tlie  truth 
of  history,  when  I  say  that,  during  their  government  of  this 
country,  no  practical  benefits  resulted  fi-om  all  this  wisdom 
and  kindness  of  sentiment ;  wdth  the  single  exception  of  Lord 
FitzwilHam,  not  one  of  them  even  attempted  to  do  any  good 
to  the  Catholics,  or  to  Ireland. 

What  did  the  Duke  of  Bedford  do  for  us  ?  Just  nothing. 
Some  civihty,  indeed,  in  words — some  playing  on  public 
creduUty — but  in  act  and  deed,  nothing  at  all.  "What  did 
Lord  Hardwicke  do  for  us  ?  Oh,  nothing,  or  rather  less  than 
nothing ;  his  administration  here  was,  in  that  respect,  a  kind 
of  negative  quality  ;  it  was  cold,  harsh,  and  forbidding  to  the 
Cathohcs ;  lenient,  mild,  and  encouraging  to  the  Orange  fac- 
tion ;  the  public  mind  lay  in  the  first  torpor  caused  by  the 
mighty  fall  of  the  Union,  and  whilst  we  lay  entranced  in  the 
obhvious  pool.  Lord  Hardwicke's  administration  proceeded 
without  a  trace  of  that  justice  and  hberality  which  it  appears 
he  must  have  thought  unbefittmg  the  season  of  his  govern- 
ment, and  which,  if  he  then  entertained,  he  certainly  con- 
cealed ;  he  ended,  however,  with  giving  us  flattering  hopes  for 
the  future.  The  Duke  of  Bedford  was  more  explicit ;  he 
promised  in  direct  terms,  and  drew  upon  the  future  exertions 
of  an  hereditary  prince,  to  compensate  us  for  present  disap- 
pointment. And  will  any  man  assert  that  the  Duke  of  Rich- 
mond is  libelled  by  a  comparison  with  Lord  Hardwicke ;  that 
he  is  traduced  when  he  is  compared  with  the  Duke  of  Bed- 
ford ?  If  the  words  actually  were  these  :  "  The  Duke  of  Rich- 
mond will  terminate  his  administration  exactly  as  Lord  Hard- 
wicke and  the  Duke  of  Bedford  terminated  their  administra- 
tions ;"  if  those  were  the  words,  none  of  you  could  possibly 
vote  for  a  conviction,  and  yet  the  meaning  is  precisely  the 
same.  No  more  is  expressed  by  the  language  of  my  client ; 
and,  if  the  meaning  be  thus  clearly  innocent,  it  would  be 
strange,  indeed,  to  call  on  you  for  a  verdict  of  conviction  upon 
no  more  sohd  ground  than  this,  that  whilst  the  signification 
was  the  same,  the  words  were  different.  And  thus,  again,  does 
the  prosecutor  require  of  you  to  separate  the  sense  from  the 
sound,  and  to  convict  for  the  sound,  against  the  sense  of  the 
passage. 


102  SELECT    SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL   o'CONNELL. 

In  plain  truth,  gentlemen,  if  there  be  a  harshness  in  the 
sound,  there  is  none  in  the  words.  The  writer  describes,  and 
means  to  describe,  the  ordinary  termination  of  every  adminis- 
tration repa}dng  in  promise  the  defaults  of  performance.  And, 
when  he  speaks  of  falsehood,  he  prophecies  merely  as  to  the 
probable  or  at  least  possible  conclusion  of  the  present  govern- 
ment. He  does  not  impute  to  any  precedent  assertion,  false- 
hood ;  but  he  does  predict,  that  the  concluding  promise  of  this, 
as  of  other  administrations,  depending  as  those  promises  always 
do  upon  other  persons  for  performance,  wiU  remain  as  former 
promises  have  remained — unfulfilled  and  unperformed.  And 
is  this  prophecy — this  prediction  a  crime?  Is  it  a  Hbel  to 
prophecy?  See  what  topics  this  sage  venerator  of  the  Hberty 
of  the  press,  the  Attorney-General,  would  fain  prohibit  ?  First, 
he  tells  you,  that  the  crimes  of  the  predecessors  of  the  Duke 
must  not  be  mentioned — and  thus  he  forbids  the  history  of 
past  events.  Secondly,  he  informs  you,  that  no  allusion  is  to 
be  made  to  the  errors,  follies,  or  even  the  striking  features 
of  the  present  governors  ;  and  thus  he  forbids  the  detail  of 
the  occurrences  of  the  present  day.  And,  thirdly,  he  declares 
that  no  conjecture  shall  be  made  upon  what  is  likely  to  occur 
hereafter ;  and  thus  he  forbids  all  attempts  to  anticipate  future 
acts. 

It  comes  simply  to  this ;  he  talks  of  venerating  the  Hberties 
of  the  press,  and  yet  he  restrains  that  press  from  discussing 
past  history,  present  story,  and  future  probabihties ;  he  pro- 
hibits the  past,  the  present,  and  the  future ;  ancient  records, 
modem  truth,  and  prophecy,  are  all  within  the  capacious 
range  of  his  punishments.  Is  there  anything  else  ?  Would 
this  venerator  of  the  liberty  of  the  press  go  further  ?  Yes, 
gentlemen,  having  forbidden  all  matter  of  history  past  and 
present,  and  aU  prediction  of  the  future,  he  generously  throws 
in  abstract  principles,  and,  as  he  has  told  you,  that  his  prisons 
shall  contain  every  person  who  speaks  of  what  was,  or  what  is, 
or  what  will  be,  he  Hkewise  consigned  to  the  same  fate  every 
person  who  treats  of  the  theory  or  principles  of  government ; 
and  yet  he  dares  to  talk  of  the  liberty  of  the  press !  Can  you 
be  his  dupes  ?  Will  you  be  his  victims  ?  Where  is  the  con- 
science— where  is  the  indignant  spirit  of    insulted    reason 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE  OP  JOHN  MAGEE.  103 

amongst  you  ?    Has  party  feeling  extinguished  in  your  breasts 
every  glow  of  virtue — every  spark  of  manhood  ? 

If  there  be  any  warmth  about  you — if  you  are  not  clay-'»old 
to  all  but  party  feeling,  I  would,  with  the  air  and  in  the  tone 
of  triumph,  call  you  to  the  consideration  of  the  remaining 
paragraph  which  has  been  sjpread  on  the  lengthened  indict- 
ment before  you.  I  divide  it  into  two  branches,  and  shall  do 
no  more  with  the  one  than  to  repeat  it.  I  have  read  it  for 
you  already  ;  I  must  read  it  again : 

"Had  he  remained  what  he  first  came  over,  or  what  he  afterwards 
professed  to  be,  he  would  have  retamed  his  reputation  for  honest,  open 
hostility,  defending  his  political  principles  with  firmness,  perliaj)s  with 
warmth,  but  without  rancor ;  the  supporter  and  not  the  tool  of  an  ad- 
ministration ;  a  mistaken  pohtician,  perhaps,  but  an  honorable  man,  and 
a  respectable  soldier." 

Would  to  God  I  had  to  address  another  jury !  Would  to 
God  I  had  reason  and  judgment  to  address,  and  I  could  en- 
tertain no  apprehension  from  passion  or  prejudice !  Here 
should  I  then  take  my  stand,  and  require  of  that  unprejudiced 
jury,  whether  this  sentence  does  not  demonstrate  the  complete 
absence  of  private  malice  or  personal  hostility.  Does  not  tliis 
sentence  prove  a  kindly  disposition  towards  the  individual, 
mixing  and  mingHng  with  that  discussion  which  freedom  sanc- 
tions and  requires,  respecting  his  political  conduct  ?  Contrast 
this  sentence  with  the  prosecutor's  accusation  of  private  malig- 
nity, and  decide  between  Mr.  Magee  and  his  icalumniators. 
He,  at  least,  has  this  advantage,  that  your  verdict  cannot  alter 
the  nature  of  things ;  and  that  the  public  must  see  and  feel 
this  truth,  that  the  present  prosecution  is  directed  against  the 
discussion  of  the  conduct  towards  the  public,  of  men  confided 
with  public  authority ;  that  this  is  a  direct  attack  upon  the 
right  to  call  the  attention  of  the  people  to  the  management  of 
the  people's  affairs,  and  that,  by  your  verdict  of  conviction,  it 
is  intended  to  leave  no  peaceful  or  una  wed  mode  of  redress  for 
the  wrongs  and  sufiferings  of  the  people. 

But  I  will  not  detain  you  on  these  obvious  topics.  We 
draw  to  a  close,  and  I  hurry  to  it.  This  sentence  is  said  to 
be  particularly  libellous : 


104:  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL    O'CONNELL. 

"His  party  woitIcI  have  been  proud  of  him  ;  his  friends  would  have 
praised  (they  need  not  have  flattered  him),  and  his  enemies,  though  they 
might  have  regretted,  must  have  respected  his  conduct ;  from  the  worst 
quarter  there  would  have  been  some  small  tribute  of  praise  ;  from  none 
any  great  portion  of  censure  ;  and  his  administration,  though  not  popu- 
lar, would  have  been  conducted  with  dignity,  and  without  offence. 
This  line  of  conduct  he  has  taken  care  to  avoid  :  his  original  character 
for  moderation  he  has  forfeited  ;  he  can  lay  no  claims  to  any  merits  for 
neutrality,  nor  does  he  even  deserve  the  cheerless  credit  of  defensive 
operations.  He  has  begun  to  act ;  he  has  ceased  to  be  a  dispassionate 
chief  governor,  who  views  the  wickedness  and  the  folly  of  faction  with 
composure  and  forbearance,  and  stands,  the  representative  of  majesty, 
aloof  from  the  contest.  He  descends  ;  he  mixes  with  the  throng  ;  he 
becomes  personally  engaged,  and,  having  lost  his  temper,  calls  forth  his 
private  passions  to  sxipport  his  public  principles ;  he  is  no  longer  an 
indifferent  viceroy,  but  a  frightful  partisan  of  an  English  ministry, 
whose  base  passions  he  indulges — whose  unworthy  resentments  he  grati- 
fies, and  on  whose  behalf  he  at  present  canvasses." 

Well,  gentlemen,  and  did  he  not  canvass  on  behalf  of  the 
ministry?  "Was  there  a  titled  or  untitled  servant  of  the  Cas- 
tle who  was  not  despatched  to  the  south  to  vote  against  the 
popvJar,  and  for  the  ministerial  candidates?  Was  there  a 
single  individual  within  the  reach  of  his  Grace  that  did  not 
vote  against  Prittie  and  Matthew,  in  Ti^perary,  and  against 
Hutchinson,  in  Cork  ?  I  have  brought  with  me  some  of  the 
newspapers  of  the  day,  in  which  this  partisanship  in  the  Lord 
Lieutenant  is  treated  by  Mr.  Hutchinson  in  language  so  strong 
and  so  pointed,  that  the  words  of  this  publication  are  mildness 
and  softness  itseK,  when  compared  with  that  language.  I  shall 
not  read  them  for  you,  because  I  should  fear  that  you  may 
imagine  I  unnecessarily  identified  my  client  with  the  violent 
but  the  merited  reprobation  poured  upon  the  scandalous  inter- 
ference of  our  government  with  those  elections. 

I  need  not,  I  am  sure,  tell  you  that  any  interference  by  the 
Lord  Lieutenant  with  the  purity  of  the  election  of  members 
to  serve  in  Parliament,  is  highly  unconstitutional,  and  highly 
criminal;  he  is  doubly  bound  to  the  most  strict  neutrahty  ; 
first,  as  a  peer,  the  law  prohibits  his  interference ;  secondly, 
as  a  representative  of  the  crown,  his  interference  in  elections 
is  an  usurpation  of  the  people's  rights ;  it  is,  in  substance  and 
effect,  high  treason  against  the  people,  and  its  mischiefs  are 


■  SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE  OF  JOHN  MAGEE.  105 

not  the  less  by  reason  of  there  being  no  punishment  afl&xed  by 
the  law  to  this  treason. 

If  this  offence,  gentlemen,  be  of  daily  occurrence — if  it  be 
frequently  committed,  it  is  upon  that  account  only  the  more 
destructive  to  our  liberties,  and,  therefore,  requires  the  more 
loud,  direct,  and  frequent  condemnation :  iadeed,  if  such 
practices  be  permitted  to  prevail,  there  is  an  end  of  every 
remnant  of  freedom ;  our  boasted  constitution  becomes  a 
mockery  and  an  object  of  ridicule,  and  we  ought  to  desire  the 
manly  simplicity  of  unmixed  despotism.  Will  the  Attorney- 
General — wiU  his  colleague,  the  Solicitor-General,  deny  that  I 
have  described  this  offence  in  its  true  colors?  Will  they 
attempt  to  deny  the  interference  of  the  Duke  of  Richmond  in 
the  late  elections  ?  I  would  almost  venture  to  put  your  ver- 
dict upon  this,  and  to  consent  to  a  conviction,  if  any  person 
shall  be  found  so  stocked  with  audacity,  as  to  presume  pub- 
licly to  deny  the  interference  of  his  Grace  in  the  late  elec- 
tions, and  his  partisanship  in  favof  of  the  ministerial  candi- 
dates. Gentlemen,  if  that  be  denied,  what  will  you,  what  can 
you  think  of  the  veracity  of  the  man  who  denies  it  ?  I  fear- 
lessly refer  the  fact  to  you ;  on  that  fact  I  build.  This  inter- 
ference is  as  notorious  as  the  sun  at  noonday ;  and  who  shall 
venture  to  deny  that  such  interference  is  described  by  a  soft 
term  when  it  is  called  partisanship?  He  who  uses  the 
influence  of  the  executive  to  control  the  choice  of  the  repre- 
■  sentatives  of  the  j)eople,  violates  the  first  principles  of  the 
constitution,  is  guilty  of  political  sacrilege,  and  profanes  the 
very  sanctuary  of  the  people's  rights  and  hberties ;  and  if  he 
should  not  be  called  a  partisan,  it  is  only  because  some 
harsher  and  more  appropriate  term  ought  to  be  appUed  to  his 
dehnquency. 

I  will  recall  to  your  minds  an  instance  of  violation  of  the 
constitution,  which  will  illustrate  the  situation  of  my  client, 
and  the  protection  which,  for  your  own  sakes,  jon  owe  him. 
When,  in  1687,  King  James  removed  several  Protestant  rec- 
tors in  Ireland  from  their  churches,  against  law  and  justice, 
and  illegally  and  unconstitutionally  placed  Roman  Catholic 
clergymen  in  their  stead,  Avould  any  of  you  be  content  that  he 
should  be  simply  called  a  partisan !     No,  gentlemen,  my  client 


106  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF    DANIEL  o'CONNELL. 

and  I — Gatliolic  and  Protestant  though  we  be — agree  per- 
fectly in  this,  that  partisan  would  have  been  too  mild  a  name 
for  him,  and  that  he  should  have  been  branded  as  a  violator 
of  law,  as  an  enemy  to  the  constitution,  and  as  a  crafty  tyrant 
who  sought  to  gratify  the  prejudices  of  one  part  of  his  sub- 
jects that  he  might  trample  upon  the  liberties  of  all.  And 
what,  I  would  fain  learn,  could  you  think  of  the  Attorney- 
General  who  prosecuted,  or  of  the  judge  who  condemned,  or 
of  the  jury  who  convicted  a  printer  for  pubhshing  to  the 
world  this  tyranny — this  gross  violation  of  law  and  justice  ? 
But  how  would  your  indignation  be  roused,  if  James  had 
been  only  called  a  partisan,  and  for  calling  him  a  partisan  a 
Popish  jury  had  been  packed,  a  Popish  judge  had  been  select- 
ed, and  that  the  printer,  who,  you  will  admit,  deserved  ap- 
plause and  reward,  met  condemnation  and  punishment. 

Of  you — of  you,  shall  this  story  be  told,  if  you  convict  Mr. 
Magee.  The  Duke  has  interfered  in  elections ;  he  has  violat- 
ed the  hberties  of  the  subject ;  he  has  profaned  the  very  tem- 
ple of  the  constitution ;  and  he,  who  has  said  that  in  so  do- 
ing, he  was  a  partisan,  from  your  hands  expects  punishment. 

Compare  the  kindred  offences ;  James  deprived  the  Protes- 
tant rectors  of  their  livings ;  he  did  not  persecute,  nor  did  he 
interfere  with  theu'  rehgion;  for  tithes,  and  oblations,  and 
glebes,  and  church  lands,  though  solid  appendages  to  any 
church,  are  no  part  of  the  Protestant  religion.  The  Protes- 
tant religion  would,  I  presume — and  for  the  honor  of  human , 
nature  I  sincerely  hope — continue  its  influence  over  the  hu- 
man mind  without  the  aid  of  those  extrinsic  advantages.  Its 
pastors  would,  I  trust  and  beheve,  have  remained  true  to  their 
charge,  without  the  adventitious  benefits  of  temporal  rewards ; 
and,  like  the  Boman  CathoHc  Church,  it  might  have  shone 
forth  a  glorious  example  of  firmness  in  reUgion,  setting  perse- 
cution at  defiance.  James  did  not  attack  the  Protestant  reh- 
gion ;  I  repeat  it ;  he  only  attacked  the  revenues  of  the  Pro- 
testant church ;  he  violated  the  law  and  the  constitution,  in 
depriving  men  of  that  property,  by  his  individual  authority, 
to  which  they  had  precisely  the  same  right  with  that  by  which 
he  wore  his  crown.  But  is  not  the  controllinsj  the  election  of 
members  of  parhament  a  more  dangerous  violation  of  the  con- 


SPEECH  m  DEFENCE  OF  JOHN  lyiAGEE.  107 

stitution  ?  Does  it  not  corrupt  the  very  sources  of  legislation, 
and  convert  the  guardians  of  the  state  into  its  plunderers  ? 
The  one  was  a  direct  and  undisguised  crime,  capable  of  being 
redressed  in  the  ordinary  course  of  the  law,  and  producing 
resistance  by  its  open  and  plain  violation  of  right  and  of  law  ; 
the  other  disguises  itself  in  so  many  shapes,  is  patronized  by 
so  many  high  examples,  and  is  followed  by  such  perfect  secu- 
rity, that  it  becomes  the  first  duty  of  every  man  who  possesses 
any  reverence  for  the  constitution,  or  any  attachment  to  lib- 
erty, to  lend  all  his  efforts  to  detect,  and,  if  possible,  to  pun- 
ish it. 

To  any  man  who  loved  the  constitution  or  freedom,  I  could 
safely  appeal  for  my  client's  vindication ;  or  if  any  displeasure 
could  be  excited  in  the  mind  of  such  a  man,  it  would  arise  be- 
cause of  the  forbearance  and  lenity  of  this  publication.  But 
the  Duke  is  called  a  frightful  partisan.  Granted,  gentlemen, 
granted.  And  is  not  the  interference  I  have  mentioned  fright- 
ful ?  Is  it  not  terrific  ?  Who  can  contemplate  it  without  shud- 
dering at  the  consequences  which  it  is  likely  to  produce  ?  "What 
gentler  phrase — what  lady-like  expression  should  my  chent 
use  ?  The  constitution  is  sought  to  be  violated,  and  he  calls 
the  author  of  that  violation  a  frightful  partisan.  Eeally,  gen- 
tlemen, the  fastidiousness  which  would  reject  this  expression 
would  be  better  employed  in  preventing  or  punishing  crime, 
than  in  dragging  to  a  dungeon  the  man  who  has  the  manhness 
to  adhere  to  truth,  and  to  use  it.  Kecollect  also — I  cannot  re- 
peat it  too  often — that  the  Attorney-General  told  you,  that 
"  the  Hberty  of  the  press  was  the  best  protection  of  the  peo- 
ple against  the  government."  Now,  if  the  constitution  be  vio- 
lated— if  the  pmity  of  election  be  disturbed  by  the  executive, 
is  not  this  precisely  the  case  when  this  protection  becomes 
necessary  ?  It  is  not  wanted,  nor  can  the  press  be  called  a 
protector,  so  long  as  the  government  is  administered  with 
fidehty,  care,  and  skill.  The  protection  of  the  press  is  requi- 
site only  when  integrity,  diligence,  or  judgment  do  not  belong 
to  the  administration  ;  and  that  protection  becomes  the  more 
necessary  in  the  exact  proportion  in  which  these  quaUties  are 
deficient.  But,  what  protection  can  it  afford  if  you  convict  in 
this  instance  ?     For,  by  doing  so,  you  will  decide  that  nothing 


108  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF    DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

ouglit  to  be  said  against  tliat  want  of  honesty,  or  of  attention, 
or  of  understanding ;  the  more  necessary  will  the  protection  of 
the  press  become,  the  more  unsafe  will  it  be  to  pubhsh  the 
truth  ;  and  in  the  exact  proportion  in  which  the  press  might 
be  useful,  will  it  become  liable  to  punishment.  In  short,  ac- 
cording to  the  Attorney-General's  doctrine,  when  the  press  is 
"  best  employed  and  wanted  most,"  it  will  be  most  dangerous 
to  use  it.  And  thus,  the  more  corrupt  and  profligate  any  ad- 
ministration may  be,  the  more  clearly  can  the  pubHc  prose- 
cutor ascertain  the  sacrifice  of  his  selected  victim.  And  call 
you  this  protection?  Is  this  a  protector  who  must  be  dis- 
armed the  moment  danger  threatens,  and  is  bound  a  prisoner 
the  instant  the  fight  has  commenced  ? 

Here  I  should  close  the  case — here  I  should  shortly  recapi- 
tulate my  client's  defence,  and  leave  him  to  your  considera- 
tion; but  I  have  been  already  too  tedious,  and  shall  do  no 
more  than  recall  to  your  recollection  the  purity,  the  integrity, 
the  entu-e  disinterestedness  of  Mr.  Magee's  motives.  If  money 
were  his  object,  he  could  easily  procure  liimself  to  be  patron- 
ized and  salaried ;  but  he  prefers  to  be  persecuted  and  dis- 
countenanced by  the  great  and  powerful,  because  they  cannot 
deprive  him  of  the  certain  expectation,  that  his  exertions  are 
useful  to  his  long-suflfering,  ill-requited  country. 

He  is  disinterested,  gentlemen ;  he  is  honest ;  the  Attorney- 
General  admitted  it,  and  actually  took  the  trouble  of  adminis- 
tering to  him  advice  how  to  amend  his  fortune,  and  save  his 
person.  But  the  advice  only  made  his  youthful  blood  mantle 
in  that  ingenuous  countenance,  and  his  reply  was  painted  in 
the  indignant  look,  that  told  the  Attorney-General  he  might 
offer  wealth,  but  he  could  not  bribe — that  he  might  torture, 
but  he  could  not  terrify  !  Yes,  gentlemeuj  firm  in  his  honesty, 
and  strong  in  the  fervor  of  his  love  of  Ireland,  he  fearlessly 
awaits  your  verdict,  convinced  that  even  you  must  respect  the 
man  whom  you  are  called  upon  to  condemn.  Look  to  it,  gen- 
tlemen ;  consider  whether  an  honest,  disinterested  man  shall 
be  prohibited  from  discussing  public  affairs  ;  consider  whether 
all  but  flattery  is  to  be  silent — whether  the  discussion  of  the 
errors  and  the  capacities  of  the  ministers  is  to  be  closed  for- 
ever.    Whether  we  are  to  be  silent  as  to  the  crimes  of  former 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE  OF  JOHN  MAGEE.  109 

periods — ^the  follies  of  tke  present,  and  the  credulity  of  the 
future ;  and/  above  all,  reflect  upon  the  demand  that  is  made 
on  you  to  punish  the  canvassing  of  abstract  principles. 

Has  the  Attorney-General  succeeded  ?  Has  he  procured  a 
jury  so  fitted  to  his  object,  as  to  be  ready  to  bury  in  obhvion 
every  fault  and  every  crime,  every  error  and  every  imperfection 
of  public  men,  past,  present,  and  future — and  who  shall,  in  ad- 
dition, silence  any  dissertation  on  the  theory  or  principle  of 
legislation  ?  Do,  gentlemen,  go  this  length  with  the  prosecutor, 
and  then  venture  on  your  oaths.  I  charge  you  to  venture  to 
talk  to  your  famihes  of  the  venerable  Uberty  of  the  press — 
the  protection  of  the  people  against  the  vices  of  the  gov- 
ernment. 

I  should  conclude,  but  the  Attorney-General  compels  me  to 
follow  him  through  another  subject ;  he  has  told  you,  and  told 
you  truly,  that  besides  the  matter  set  out  in  the  indictment — 
the  entke  of  which,  gentlemen,  we  have  already  gone  through — 
this  publication  contains  severe  strictures  upon  the  alleged  in- 
delicacy in  the  Chief  Justice  issuing  a  ministerial  warrant,  in 
a  case  which  was  afterwards  to  come  before  him  judicially, 
and  upon  the  manner  in  which  the  jury  was  attempted  to  be 
put  together  in  Doctor  Sheridan's  case,  and  in  which  a  jury 
was  better  arranged  in  the  case  of  Mr.  Kirwan.  Indeed,  the 
Attorney-General  seemed  much  delighted  with  these  topics  ; 
he  again  burst  out  into  an  enraptured  encomium  upon  himself  ; 
and,  as  it  were  inspired  by  his  subject,  he  rose  to  the  dignity 
of  a  classical  quotation,  when  he  exclaimed  :  "  Me,  me,  adsum, 
qui  feci."  He  forgot  to  add  the  still  more  appropriate  remain- 
der of  the  sentence,  "  mea  fraus  omnis  !' 

"  Yes,  gentlemen,  he  has  avowed  with  more  manliness  than 
discretion,  that  he  was  the  contriver  of  all  those  measures. 
With  respect  to  the  warrant  which  his  lordship  issued  in  the 
stead  of  the  ordinary  justices  of  the  peace,  and  upon  a  charge 
not  amounting  to  any  breach  of  the  peace,  I  shall  say  nothing 
at  present.  An  obvious  dehcacy  restrains  me  fi"om  entering  up- 
on that  subject ;  and  as  the  interest  of  my  client  does  not  coun- 
teract that  delicacy,  I  shall  refrain.  But  I  would  not  have  it 
understood  that  I  have  formed  no  opinion  on  the  subject. 
Yes,  I  have  formed  an  opinion,  and  a  strong  and  decided 


110  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

opinion,  which  I  am  ready  to  support  as  a  lawyer  and  a  man, 
but  the  expression  of  which  I  now  sacrifice  to  a  plain  dehcacy. 
But  I  must  say,  that  the  Attorney-General  has  thrown  new 
light  on  this  business ;  he  has  given  us  information  we  did  not 
possess  before.  I  did  not  before  know  that  the  warrant  was 
sought  for  and  procured  by  the  Attorney-General ;  I  thought 
it  was  the  spontaneous  act  of  his  lordship,  and  not  in  conse- 
quence of  any  private  solicitation  from  the  Attorney-General. 
In  this  respect,  he  has  set  me  right — it  is  a  fact  of  considera- 
ble value,  and  although  the  consequences  to  be  deduced  fi'om 
it  are  not  pleasing  to  any  man,  loving,  as  I  do,  the  purity  of 
justice,  yet,  I  most  heartily  thank  the  Attorney-General  for 
the  fact — the  important  fact. 

His  second  avowal  relates  to  Dr.  Sheridan.  It  really  is 
comfortable  to  know  how  much  of  the  indecent  scene  exhib- 
ited upon  his  trial  belonged  to  the  Attorney-General.  He 
candidly  tells  us,  that  the  obtrusion  of  the  pohce  magistrate, 
Sirr,  as  an  assistant  to  the  Crown-Solicitor,  was  the  act  of 
the  king's  Attorney-General.  "Adsum  qui  feci,"  said  he. 
Thus  he  avows  that  he  procured  an  Orangeman — I  do  not  ex- 
actly understand  what  is  meant  by  an  Orangeman — some  of 
you  could  easily  tell  me — that  he  caused  this  Orangeman  to 
stand  in  open  court,  next  to  the  Solicitor  for  the  Crown,  with 
his  written  paper,  suggesting  who  were  fit  jm'ors  for  his  pur- 
pose, and  who  should  be  put  by.  Gentlemen,  he  avows  that 
this  profligate  scene  was  acted  in  the  open  court,  by  his  direc- 
tions. It  was  by  the  Attorney-General's  special  directions, 
then,  that  such  men  as  John  Lindsay,  of  Sackville  street,  and 
John  Eoche,  of  Strand  street,  were  set  aside  ;  the  latter,  be- 
cause, though  amongst  the  most  wealthy  and  respectable  mer- 
chants in  your  city,  he  is  a  Papist ;  and  the  other,  because, 
although  a  Protestant,  he  is  tainted  with  hberahty — the  only 
offence,  public  or  private,  that  could  be  attributed  to  him. 
Yes,  such  men  as  these  were  set  aside  by  the  Attorney-Gene- 
ral's aid-de  camp,  the  salaried  justice  of  the  police  office. 

The  next  avowal  is  also  precious.  This  publication  contains 
also  a  commentary  on  the  Castle-list  jury  that  convicted  Mr. 
Kirwan,  and  the  Attorney-General  has  also  avowed  his  share 
in  that  transaction ;  he  thus  supphes  the  only  link  we  wanted 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE  OF  JOHN  MAGEE.  Ill 

in  our  cliaiii  of  evidence,  when  we  cliallengecl  the  array  upon 
that  trial.  If  we  could  have  proved  that  which  the  Attorney- 
General  with  his  "  adsum  qui  feci,"  yesterday  admitted,  we 
should  have  succeeded  and  got  rid  of  that  panel.  Even  now, 
it  is  deUghtful  to  understand  the  entire  machinery,  and  one 
now  sees  at  once  the  reason  why  Sir  Charles  Saxton  was  not 
examined  on  the  part  of  the  crown,  in  reply  to  the  case  we 
made.  He  would,  you  now  plainly  see,  have  traced  the  ar- 
rangement to  the  Attorney-General,  and  the  array  must  have 
been  quashed.  Thus  in  the  boasting  humor  of  this  Attorney- 
General,  he  has  brought  home  to  himself  personally,  that 
which  we  attributed  to  liim  only  in  his  official  capacity,  and 
he  has  convicted  the  man  of  that  which  we  charged  only  upon 
the  office. 

He  has,  he  must  have  a  motive  for  this  avowal ;  if  he  had 
not  an  adequate  object  in  view,  he  would  not  have  thus  un- 
necessarily and  wantonly  taken  upon  himself  all  the  reproach 
of  those  transactions.  He  would  not  have  boasted  of  having, 
out  of  court,  sohcited  an  extra-judicial  opinion,  in  the  form  of 
a  warrant  from  his  lordship ;  he  would  not  have  gloried  in 
employing  an  Orangeman  from  the  pohce  office  to  assist  him 
in  open  court,  with  instructions  in  writing  how  to  pack  his 
jmy ;  still  less  would  he  have  suffered  it  to  be  believed  that  he 
was  a  party  at  the  Castle,  with  the  Acting  Secretary  of  State, 
to  the  arrangement  of  the  jury  that  was  afterwards  to  try  a 
person  prosecuted  by  the  state. 

He  would  not  have  made  this,  I  must  say,  disgraceful  avowal, 
unless  he  were  influenced  by  an  adequate  motive.  I  can  easily 
tell  you  what  that  motive  was.  He  knew  your  prejudices — he 
knew  your  antipathy — alas !  your  interested  antipathy — to  the 
Cathohcs,  and,  therefore,  in  order  to  induce  you  to  con-vdct  a 
Protestant  of  a  hbel  for  a  publication,  innocent,  if  not  useful 
in  itself,  in  order  to  procure  that  conviction  from  your  party 
feelings  and  your  prejudices,  which  he  despaired  of  obtaining 
from  your  judgments,  he  vaunts  himself  to  you  as  the  mighty 
destroyer  of  the  hopes  of  Popish  petitioners — as  a  man  capa- 
ble of  every  act  within,  as  without  the  profession,  to  prevent  or 
impede  any  rehef  to  the  Papists.  In  short,  he  wishes  to  show 
himself  to  you  as  an  active  partisan  at  your  side  ;   and  upon 


112  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  o'COXNELL. 

those  merits  lie  who  knows  you  best,  claims  yom-  verdict — a 
verdict  which  must  be  given  in  on  your  oaths,  and  attested  by 
and  in  the  name  of  the  God  of  all  Christians. 

For  my  part  I  frankly  avow  that  I  shudder  at  these  scenes  ; 
I  cannot,  without  horror,  view  this  interfering  and  intermed- 
dhng  with  judges  and  juries,  and  my  abhorrence  must  be  aug- 
mented, when  I  find  it  avowed,  that  the  actors  in  all  these  sad 
exhibitions  were  the  mere  puppets  of  the  Attorney-General, 
moved  by  his  wires,  and  performing  under  his  control.  It  is 
in  vain  to  look  for  safety  to  person  or  property,  whilst  this 
system  is  allowed  to  pervade  ou^  coui'ts ;  the  very  fountain  of 
justice  may  be  corrupted  at  its  source,  and  those  waters  which 
should  confer  health  and  vigor  throughout  the  land,  can  then 
diffuse  nought  but  mephitic  and  pestilential  vapors  to  disgust 
and  to  destroy.  If  honesty,  if  justice  be  silent,  yet  prudence 
ought  to  check  these  practices.  We  live  in  a  new  era — a  mel- 
ancholy era,  in  which.perfidy  and  profligacy  are  sanctioned  by 
high  authority ;  the  base  violation  of  phghted  faith,  the  deep 
stain  of  dishonor,  infidehty  in  love,  treachery  in  friendship,  the 
abandonment  of  every  principle,  and  the  adoption  of  every 
frivolity  and  of  every  vice  that  can  excite  hatred  combined 
with  ridicule — all — all  this,  and  more,  may  be  seen  around  us  ; 
and  yet  it  is  beheved,  it  is  expected,  that  this  system  is  fated 
to  be  eternal.  Gentlemen,  we  shall  all  weep  the  insane  delu- 
sion ;  and  in  the  terrific  moments  of  altercation  you  know  not, 
you  cannot  know,  how  soon  or  how  bitterly  the  ingredients 
of  your  own  poisoned  chaHce  may  be  commended  to  your  own 
lips. 

"With  these  views  around  us — with  these  horrible  prospects 
lying  obscurely  before  us — ^in  sadness  and  in  sorrow,  party 
feelings  may  find  a  soUtary  consolation.  My  heart  feels  a 
species  of  relief  when  I  recollect  that  not  one  single  Roman 
Cathohc  has  been  found  suited  to  the  Attorney- General's  pur- 
pose. With  what  an  affectation  of  hberality  would  he  have 
placed,  at  least,  one  Roman  Cathohc  on  his  juiies,  if  he 
could  have  found  one  Roman  Catholic  gentleman  in  this  city 
capable  of  being  managed  into  fitness  for  those  juries.  You 
well  know  that  the  very  first  merchants  of  this  city,  in  wealth 
as  well  as  in  character,  are  Catholics.     Some  of  you  serve  oc- 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE  OF  JOHN  MAGEE.  113 

casionally  on  special  juries  in  important  cases  of  private  prop- 
erty. Have  you  ever  seen  one  of  those  special  juries  -without 
many  Catholics? — frequently  a  majority — seldom  less  than 
one-haK  of  Catholics.  Why  are  CathoHcs  excluded  from  these 
state  juries?  Who  shall  venture  to  avow  the  reason?  Oh, 
for  the  partisan  indiscretion  that  would  bhndly  avow  the  rea- 
son !  It  is,  in  truth,  a  high  compHment,  which  persecution,  in 
spite  of  itself,  pays  to  independent  integrity. 

It  is,  in  fact,  a  comphment.  It  is  intended  for  a  reproach, 
for  a  Hbel.  It  is  meant  to  insinuate  that  such  a  man,  for  ex- 
ample, as  Eandall  M'Donnell — the  pride  and  boast  of  com- 
merce— one  of  the  fii'st  contributors  to  the  revenues  of  the 
state,  and  the  first  in  all  the  sweet  charities  of  social  life — 
would  refuse  to  do  justice,  upon  his  oath,  to  the  croAvn,  and 
perjure  himself  in  a  state  trial,  because  he  is  a  Boman  Catho- 
Hc.  You,  even  you,  would  be  shocked,  if  any  man  were  so 
audacious  as  to  assert,  in  words,  so  foul  a  hbel,  so  false  a  cal- 
umny ;  and  yet  what  does  the  conduct  of  the  Attorney-Gene- 
ral amount  to  ?  Why,  practically,  to  just  such  a  hbel,  to  pre- 
cisely such  a  calumny.  He  acts  a  part  which  he  would  not 
venture  to  speak,  and  endeavors  silently  to  inflict  a  censure 
which  no  man  could  be  found  so  devoid  of  shame  as  to  assert 
in  words.  And  here,  gentlemen,  is  a  hbel  for  which  there  is 
no  punishment ;  here  is  a  profligate  calumny  for  which  the  law 
furnishes  no  redress ;  he  can  continue  to  calumniate  us  by  his 
rejection.  See  whether  he  does  not  ofl'er  you  a  greater  insult 
by  his  selection ;  lay  your  hands  to  your  hearts,  and  in  pri- 
vate communion  with  yourselves,  ask  the  reason  why  you 
have  been  sought  for  and  selected  for  this  jury — will  you 
discover  that  you  have  been  selected  because  of  admitted 
impartiality  ? 

Would  to  God  you  could  make  that  discovery !  It  would 
be  one  on  which  my  chent  might  build  the  certain  expecta- 
tion of  a  triumphal  acquittal. 

Let  me  transport  you  from  the  heat  and  fury  of  domestic  poH- 
tics  ;  let  me  place  you  in  a  foreign  land  ;  you  are  Protestants  ; 
with  your  good  leave,  you  shall  for  a  moment  be  Portuguese, 
and  Portuguese  is  now  an  honorable  name,  for  right  well  have 
the  people  of  Portugal  fought  for  their  country,  against  the 


114  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL    O'CONNELL. 

foreign  invader.  Oli,  liow  easy  to  procure  a  similar  spirit,  and 
more  of  bravery,  amongst  the  people  of  Ireland  !  The  slight 
purchase  of  good  words,  and  a  kindly  disposition,  would  con- 
vert them  into  an  impenetrable  guard  for  the  safety  of  the 
Throne  and  the  State.  But  advice  and  regret  are  equally 
unavailing,  and  they  are  doomed  to  calumny  and  oppression, 
the  reahty  of  persecution,  and  the  mockery  of  justice,  until 
some  fatal  hour  shall  arrive,  which  may  preach  wisdom  to  the 
dupes,  and  menace  with  punishment  the  oppressor. 

In  the  meantime  I  must  place  you  in  Portugal.  Let  us 
suppose  for  an  instant  that  the  Protestant  religion  is  that  of 
the  people  of  Portugal — the  CathoKc  that  of  the  government 
— that  the  house  of  Braganza  has  not  reigned,  but  that  Por- 
tugal is  still  governed  by  the  viceroy  of  a  foreign  nation,  from 
whom  no  kindness,  no  favor  has  ever  flowed,  and  from  whom 
justice  has  rarely  been  obtained,  and  upon  those  unfrequent 
occasions,  not  conceded  generously,  but  extorted  by  force,  or 
wrung  from  distress  by  terror  and  apprehension,  in  a  stinted 
measure  and  ungracious  manner  ;  you,  Protestants,  shall  form, 
not,  as  with  us  in  Ireland,  nine  tenths,  but  some  lesser  nvim- 
ber — ^you  shall  be  only  four  fifths  of  the  population  ;  and  all  the 
persecution  which  you  have  yourselves  practiced  here  upon  Pa- 
pists, whilst  you,  at  the  same  time,  accused  the  Papists  of  the 
crime  of  being  persecutors,  shall  glow  around  ;  your  native 
land  shall  be  to  you  the  country  of  strangers  ;  you  shall  be 
ahens  in  the  soil  that  gave  you  birth,  and  whilst  every  for- 
eigner may,  in  the  land  of  your  forefathers,  attain  rank,  sta- 
tion, emolument,  honors,  you  alone  shall  be  excluded ;  and 
you  shall  be  excluded  for  no  other  reason  but  a  conscientious 
abhorrence  to  the  rehgion  of  your  ancestors. 

Only  think,  gentlemen,  of  the  scandalous  injustice  of  pun- 
ishing you  because  you  are  Protestants !  With  what  scorn, 
with  what  contempt  do  you  not  hsten  to  the  stale  pretences — 
to  the  miserable  excuses  by  which,  under  the  name  of  state 
reasons  and  political  arguments,  your  exclusion  and  de- 
gradation are  sought  to  be  justified.  Your  reply  is  ready  : 
"  Perform  your  iniquity — men  of  crimes  (you  exclaim)  be  un- 
just— punish  us  for  our  fidelity  and  honest  adherence  to  truth, 
but  insult  us  not  by  supposing  that  your  reasoning  can  impose 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE   OF  JOHN  MAGEE.  115 

Upon  a  single  individual  either  of  us  or  of  yourselves."  In 
this  situation  let  me  give  you  a  viceroy  ;  he  shall  be  a  man 
who  may  be  styled — by  some  persons  disposed  to  exaggerate, 
beyond  bounds,  his  merits,  and  to  flatter  him  more  than 
enough — "  an  honorable  man  and  a  respectable  soldier,"  but 
in  point  of  fact,  he  shall  be  of  that  httle-minded  class  of  beings 
who  are  suited  to  be  the  plaything  of  knaves — one  of  those 
men  who  imagine  they  govern  a  nation,  whilst  in  reahty  they 
are  but  the  instruments  upon  which  the  crafty  play  with  safety 
and  with  profit.  Take  such  a  man  for  your  viceroy — Protes- 
tant Portuguese.  We  shall  begin  with  making  this  tour  from 
Tralos  Montes  to  the  kingdom  of  Algesiras — as  one  amongst 
us  should  say,  from  the  Giant's  Causeway  to  the  kingdom  of 
Kerry.  Upon  his  tour  he  shall  affect  great  candor  and  good 
will  to  the  poor  suffering  Protestants.  The  bloody  anniver- 
saries of  the  inquisitorial  triumphs  of  former  days  shall  be  for 
a  season  abandoned,  and  over  our  inherent  hostihty  the  garb 
of  hypocrisy  shall  for  a  season  be  thrown.  Enmity  to  the 
Protestants  shall  become,  for  a  moment,  less  apparent ;  but  it 
will  be  only  the  more  odious  for  the  transitory  disguise. 

The  delusion  of  the  hour  having  served  its  purpose,  your 
viceroy  shows  himself  in  his  native  colors  ;  he  selects  for 
office,  and  prefers  for  his  pension-list,  the  men  miserable  in 
intellect,  if  they  be  but  virulent  against  the  Protestants ;  to 
rail  against  the  Protestant  reUgion — to  turn  its  hohest  rites 
into  ridicule — to  slander  the  individual  Protestants,  are  the 
surest,  the  only  means  to  obtain  his  favor  and  patronage.  He 
selects  from  his  Popish  bigots  some  being  more  canine  than 
human,  who,  not  having  talents  to  sell,  brings  to  the  market 
of  bigotry  his  impudence  — who,  with  no  quahty  under  heaven 
but  gross,  vulgar,  acrimonious,  disgustful  and  shameless  abuse 
of  Protestantism  to  recommend  him,  shall  be  promoted  to 
some  accountant-generalship,  and  shall  riot  in  the  spoils  of 
the  people  he  traduces,  as  it  were  to  crown  with  insult  the 
severest  injuries.  This  viceroy  selects  for  his  favorite  privy 
councillor  some  learned  doctor,  half  lawyer,  half  divine,  an 
enth'e  brute,  distinguished  by  the  unblushing  repetition  of 
calumnies  against  the  Protestants.  This  man  has  asserted 
that  Protestants  are  perjurers  and  murderers  in  principle — 


116  SELECT  SPEECHES    OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

that  they  keep  no  faith  with  Papists,  but  hold  it  lawful  and 
meritorious  to  violate  every  engagement,  and  commit  every 
atrocity  towards  any  person  who  happens  to  differ  with  Pro- 
testants in  rehgious  behef.  This  man  raves  thus,  in  public, 
against  the  Protestants,  and  has  turned  his  ravings  into  large 
personal  emoluments.  But  whilst  he  is  the  oracle  of  minor 
bigots,  he  does  not  believe  himself ;  he  has  selected  for  the 
partner  of  his  tenderest  joys,  of  his  most  ecstatic  moments — 
he  has  chosen  for  the  intended  mother  of  his  children,  for  the 
sweetener  and  solace  of  his  every  care,  a  Protestant,  gentle- 
men of  the  jury. 

Next  to  the  vile  instruments  of  bigotry,  his  accountant-gen- 
eral and  privy  councillor,  we  will  place  his  acts.  The  Protes- 
tants of  Portugal  shall  be  exposed  to  insult  and  slaughter ;  an 
Orange  party — a  party  of  Popish  Orangemen,  shall  be  sup- 
posed to  exist;  they  shall  have  liberty  to  slaughter  the  un- 
armed and  defenceless  Protestants,  as  they  sit  peaceably 
at  their  firesides.  They  shall  be  let  loose  in  some  Portuguese 
district  called  Monaghan;  they  shall  cover  the  streets  of 
some  Portuguese  town  of  Belfast  with  human  gore ;  and  in 
the  metropohs  of  Lisbon,  the  Protestant  widow  shall  have 
her  harmless  child  murdered  in  the  noonday,  and  his  blood 
shall  have  flowed  unrequited,  because  his  assassin  was  very 
loyal  when  he  was  drunk,  and  had  an  irresistible  propensity 
to  signahze  his  loyalty  by  killing  Protestants.  Behold,  gen- 
tlemen, this  viceroy  depriving  of  command,  and  staying  the 
promotion  of,  every  military  man  who  shall  dare  to  think  Pro- 
testants men,  or  who  shall  presume  to  suggest  that  they  ought 
not  to  be  jDi'osecuted.  Behold  this  viceroy  promoting  and 
rewarding  the  men  who  insulted  and  attempted  to 'degrade 
the  first  of  your  Protestant  nobility.  Behold  him  in  public, 
the  man  I  have  described. 

In  his  personal  concerns  he  receives  an  enormous  revenue 
from  the  people  he  thus  misgoverns.  See  in  his  management 
of  that  revenue  a  parsimony  at  which  even  his  enemies  blush. 
See  the  paltry  sum  of  a  single  joe  refused  to  any  Protestant 
charity,  whilst  his  bounty  is  unknown  even  at  the  Popish 
institutions  for  benevolent  purposes.  See  the  most  wasteful 
expenditure  of    the  pubHc  money — every    job  patronized — 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE  OF  JOHN  MAGEE.  117 

every  profligacy  enconraged.  See  the  resources  of  Portugal 
diminislied.  See  her  discords  and  her  internal  feuds  increased. 
And,  lastly,  behold  the  course  of  justice  perverted  and  cor- 
rupted. 

It  is  thus,  gentlemen,  the  Protestant  Portuguese  seek  to 
obtain  relief  by  humble  petition  and  supplication.  There  can 
be  no  crime  surely  for  a  Protestant  oppressed,  because  he  fol- 
lows a  rehgion  which  is,  in  his  opinion,  true,  to  endeavor  to 
obtain  rehef  by  mildly  representing  to  his  Popish  oppressors, 
that  it  is  the  right  of  every  man  to  worship  the  Deity  accord- 
ing to  the  dictates  of  his  own  conscience  ;  to  state  respect- 
fully to  the  governing  powers  that  it  is  unjust,  and  may  be 
highly  impohtic  to  punish  men,  merely  because  they  do  not 
profess  Popery,  which  they  do  not  beheve;  and  to  submit, 
with  all  humihty,  that  to  lay  the  burdens  of  the  state  equally, 
and  distribute  its  benefits  partially,  is  not  justice,  but, 
although  sanctioned  by  the  pretence  of  religious  zeal,  is,  in 
truth,  iniquity,  and  palpably  criminal.  Well,  gentlemen,  for 
daring  thus  to  remonstrate,  the  Protestants  are  persecuted. 
The  first  step  in  the  persecution  is  to  pervert  the  plain  mean- 
ing of  the  Portuguese  language,  and  a  law  prohibiting  any 
disguise  in  apparel,  shall  be  appHed  to  the  ordinary  dress  of 
the  individual ;  it  reminds  one  of  pretence  and  purpose. 

To  carry  on  these  persecutions,  the  viceroy  chooses  for  his 
first  inquisitor  the  descendant  of  some  Popish  refugee — some 
man  with  an  hereditary  hatred  to  Protestants ;  he  is  not  the 
son  of  an  Irishman,  this  refugee  inquisitor — no,  for  the  fact  is 
notorious,  that  the  Irish  refugee  Papists  were  ever  distin- 
guished for  their  hberaHty,  as  well  as  for  their  gallantry  in  the 
field  and  talent  in  the  cabinet.  This  inquisitor  shall  be,  gen- 
tlemen, a  descendant  from  one  of  those  EngHsh  Papists,  who 
was  the  dupe  or  contriver  of  the  Gunpowder  Plot!  With 
such  a  chief  inquisitor,  can  you  conceive  anything  more  cal- 
culated to  rouse  you  to  agony  than  the  solemn  mockery  of 
your  trial?  This  chief  inquisitor  begins  by  influencing  the 
judges  out  of  court ;  he  proceeds  to  inquire  out  fit  men  for  his 
interior  tribunal,  which,  for  brevity,  we  will  call  a  jury.  He 
selects  his  juries  from  the  most  violent  of  the  Popish 
Orangemen  of  the  city,  and  procures  a  conviction  against  law 


118  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

and  common  sense,  and  without  evidence.  Have  you  followed 
me,  gentlemen?  Do  you  enter  into  the  feelings  of  Protes- 
tants thus  insulted,  thus  oppressed,  thus  persecuted — their 
enemies  and  traducers  promoted,  and  encouraged,  and  richly 
rewarded — their  friends  discountenanced  and  displaced — their 
persons  unprotected,  and  their  characters  assailed  by  hired 
calumniators — their  blood  shed  with  impunity — their  revenues 
parsimoniously  spared  to  accumulate  for  the  individual,  waste- 
fully  squandered  for  the  state — the  emblems  of  discord,  the 
war-cry  of  disimion,  sanctioned  by  the  highest  authority,  and 
Justice  herself  converted  from  an  impartial  arbitrator  into  a 
fi'ightful  partisan  ? 

Yes,  gentlemen,  place  yourselves  as  Protestants  under  such 
a  persecution.  Behold  before  you  this  chief  inquisitor,  with 
his  prejudiced  tribunal — this  gambler,  with  a  loaded  die  ;  and 
now  say  what  are  your  feelings — what  are  your  sensations  of 
disgust,  abhorrence,  affright  ?  But  if  at  such  a  moment  some 
ardent  and  enthusiastic  Papist,  regardless  of  his  interests, 
and  roused  by  the  crimes  that  were  thus  committed  against 
you,  should  describe,  in  measured,  and  cautious,  and  cold  lan- 
guage, scenes  of  oppression  and  iniquity — if  he  were  to  de- 
scribe them,  not  as  I  have  done,  but  in  feeble  and  mild  lan- 
guage, and  simply  state  the  facts  for  your  benefit  and  the 
instruction  of  the  public — if  this  liberal  Papist,  for  this,  were 
dragged  to  the  Inquisition,  as  for  a  crime,  and  menaced  with 
a  dungeon  for  years,  good  and  gracious  God !  how  would  you 
revolt  and  abominate  the  men  who  could  consign  him  to  that 
dungeon !  With  what  an  eye  of  contempt,  and  hatred,  and 
despair,  would  you  not  look  at  the  packed  and  profligate  tri- 
bunal, which  could  direct  punishment  against  him  who  de- 
served rewards !  What  pity  would  you  not  feel  for  the  advo- 
cate who,  heavily  and  without  hope,  labored  in  his  defence ! 
and  with  what  agonized  and  frenzied  despair  would  you  not 
look  to  the  future  destinies  of  a  land  in  which  perjury  was 
organized  and  from  which  humanity  and  justice  had  been  for 
ever  banished ! 

With  this  picture  of  yourselves  in  Portugal,  come  home  to  us 
in  Ireland,  say  is  that  a  crime,  when  applied  to  Protestants, 
which  is  a  virtue  and  a  merit  when  applied  to  Papists  ?     Be- 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE  OF  JOHN  MAGEE.  119 

hold  how  we  suffer  here ;  and  then  reflect,  that  it  is  princi- 
pall}^  by  reason  of  your  prejudices  against  us  that  the  Attor- 
ney-General hopes  for  your  verdict.  The  good  man  has  talkea 
of  his  impartiality ;  he  will  suppress,  he  says,  the  licentious- 
ness of  the  press.  I  have,  I  hope,  shown  you  the  right  of  my 
chent  to  discuss  the  public  subjects  which  he  has  discussed  in 
the  manner  they  are  treated  of  in  the  publication  before  you, 
yet  he  is  prosecuted.  Let  me  read  for  you  a  paragraph  which 
the  Attorney-General  has  not  prosecuted — which  he  has  re- 
fused to  prosecute  : 

Balltbay,  July  4,  1813. 
"  A  meeting  of  the  Orange  Lodges  was  agreed  on,  in  cousequence  of  the 
manner  in  which  the  Cathohcs  wished  to  have  persecuted  the  loyahsts  in 
this  county  last  year,  when  they  even  murdered  some  of  them  for  no 
other  reason  than  their  being  yeomen  and  Protestants." 

And,  again — 

"It  was  at  Ballybay  that  the  Cathohcs  murdered  one  Hughes,  a  yeo- 
man sergeant,  for  being  a  Protestant,  as  was  given  in  evidence  at  the 
assizes  by  a  Cathohc  witness." 

I  have  read  this  passage  from  the  Hibernian  Journal  of  the 
7th  of  this  month.  I  know  not  whether  you  can  hear,  un- 
moved, a  paragraph  which  makes  my  blood  boil  to  read  ;  but 
I  shall  only  tell  you,  that  the  Attorney-General  refused  to 
prosecute  this  hbeller.  Gentlemen,  there  have  been  several 
murders* committed  in  the  County  of  Monaghan,  in  wliicli  Bal- 
lybay Hes.  The  persons  kiUed  happened  to  be  Roman  Catho- 
hcs ;  their  murderers  are  Orangemen.  Several  of  the  persons 
accused  of  these  murders  are  to  be  tried  at  the  ensuing  assizes. 
The  agent  apphed  to  me  personally,  with  this  newspaper ;  he 
stated  that  the  obvious  intention  was  to  create  a  prejudice 
upon  the  approaching  trials  favorable  to  the  murderers,  and 
against  the  prosecutors.  He  stated  what  you — even  you — 
wdU  easily  beheve,  that  there  never  was  a  falsehood  more  flagi- 
tiously destitute  of  truth  than  the  entire  paragraph.  I  advised 
him,  gentlemen,  to  wait  on  the  Attorney-General  in  the  most 
respectful  manner  possible  ;  to  show  him  this  paragraph,  then 
to  request  to  be  allowed  to  satisfy  him  as  to  the  utter  false- 
hood of  the  assertions  which  this  paragraph  contained,  which 
could  be  more  easily  done,  as  the  judges  who  went  that  circuit 


120  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL    O'CONNELL. 

could  prove  part  of  it  to  be  false ;  and  I  directed  liim  to  en- 
treat that  tlie  Attorney-General,  when  fully  satisfied  of  tlie 
falsehood,  would  prosecute  the  pubhsher  of  this,  which,  I 
think,  I  may  call  an  atrocious  libel. 

Gentlemen,  the  Attorney-General  was  accordingly  waited 
on  ;  he  was  respectfully  requested  to  prosecute  upon  the  terms 
of  having  the  falsehood  of  these  assertions  first  proved  to  him. 
I  need  not  tell  you  he  refused.  These  are  not  the  hbellers  he 
prosecutes.  Gentlemen,  this  not  being  a  libel  on  any  indivi- 
dual, no  private  individual  can  prosecute  for  it ;  and  the  Attor- 
ney-General turns  his  press  loose  on  the  Catholics  of  the 
county  of  Monaghan,  whilst  he  virulently  assails  Mr.  Magee 
for  what  must  be  admitted  to  be  comparatively  mild  and  inof- 
fensive. 

No,  gentlemen,  he  does  not  prosecute  this  libel.  On  the 
contrary,  this  paper  is  paid  enormous  sums  of  the  pubHc 
money.  There  are  no  less  than  five  proclamations  in  the  pa- 
per containing  this  libel ;  and  it  was  proved  in  my  presence, 
in  a  court  of  justice,  that,  besides  the  proclamations  and  pub- 
lic advertisements,  the  two  proprietors  of  the  paper  had  each 
a  pension  of  £400  per  annum,  for  supporting  government,  as 
it  was  called.  Since  that  period  one  of  those  proprietors  has 
got  an  ofiice  worth,  at  least,  XbOO  a  year ;  and  the  son  of  the 
other,  a  place  of  upwards  of  <£400  per  annum  :  so  that,  as  it  is 
likely  that  the  original  pensions  continue,  here  may  be  an  an- 
nual income  of  X2,000  paid  for  this  paper,  besides  the  thousands 
of  pounds  annually,  which  the  insertion  of  the  proclamations 
and  public  advertisements  cost.  It  is  a  paper  of  the  very 
lowest  and  most  paltry  scale  of  talent,  and  its  circulation  is, 
fortunately,  very  limited ;  but  it  receives  several  thousands  of 
pounds  of  the  money  of  the  men  whom  it  foully  and  falsely 
calumniates.  * 

W«ould  I  could  see  the  man  who  pays  this  proclamation 
money  and  these  pensions  at  the  Castle.  [Here  Mr.  O'Con- 
neU  turned  round  to  where  Mr.  Peele,  Chief  Secretary  to  the 
Lord  Lieutenant,  sat.]  AVould  I  could  see  the  man  who, 
against  the  fact,  asserted  that  the  proclamations  were  inserted 
in  all  the  papers,  save  in  those  whose  proprietors  were  con- 
yicted  of  a  libel.     I  would  ask  him  whether  this  be  a  paper 


I 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE  OF  JOHN  MAGEE.  121 

that  ouglit  to  receive  the  money  of  the  Irish  people  ? — whether 
this  be  the  legitimate  use  of  the  pubUc  purse  ?    And  when  you 
find  this  calumniator  salaried  and  rewarded,  where  is  the  im- 
partiaUty,  the  justice,  or  even  the  decency  of  prosecuting  Mr. 
Magee  for  a  hbel,  merely  because  he  has  not  praised  pubhc 
men,  and  has  discussed  pubhc  affairs  in  the  spmt  of  freedom 
and  of  the  constitution  ?     Contrast  the  situation  of  Mr.  Magee 
with  the  proprietor  of  the  Hibernian  Journal ;  the  one  is  prose- 
cuted with  all  the  weight  and  influence  of  the  crown,  the  other 
pensioned  by  the  ministers  of  the  crown ;  the  one  dragged  to 
your  bar  for  the  sober  discussion  of  poHtical  topics,  the  other 
hired  to  disseminate  the  most  horrid  calumnies !     Let  the  At- 
torney-General now  boast  of  his  impartiality ;  can  you  credit 
him  on  your  oaths  ?     Let  him  talk  of  his  veneration  for  the 
liberty  of  the  press ;  can  you  beheve  liim  in  your  consciences? 
Let  him  call  the  press  the  protection  of  the  people  against  the 
government.     Yes,  gentlemen,  believe  him  when  he  says  so. 
Let  the  press  be  the  protection  of  the  people  ;  he  admits  that 
it  ought  to  be  so.     Will  you  find  a  verdict  for  him,  that  shall 
contradict  the  only  assertion  upon  which  he  and  I,  however, 
are  both  agreed  ? 

Gentlemen,  the  Attorney-General  is  bound  by  this  admis- 
sion ;  it  is  part  of  his  case,  and  he  is  the  prosecutor  here ; 
it  is  a  part  of  the  evidence  before  you,  for  he  is  the  prose- 
cutor. Then,  gentlemen,  it  is  your  duty  to  act  upon  that  evi- 
dence, and  to  allow  the  press  to  afford  some  protection  to  the 
people. 

Is  there  amongst  you  any  one  friend  to  freedom  ?  Is  there 
amongst  you  one  man,  who  esteems  equal  and  impartial  jus- 
tice, who  values  the  people's  rights  as  the  foundation  of  pri- 
vate happiness,  and  who  considers  life  as  no  boon  without 
liberty?  Is  there  amongst  you  one  friend  to  the  constitu- 
tion— one  man  who  hates  oppression  ?  If  there  be,  Mr. 
Magee  appeals  to  his  kindred  mind,  and  confidently  expects 
an  acquittal. 

There  are  amongst  you  men  of  great  religious  zeal — of  much 
public  piety.  Ai'e  you  sincere  ?  Do  you  believe  what  you  pro- 
fess ?  With  all  tliis  zeal — with  all  this  piety,  is  there  any  con- 
science amongst  you  ?     Is  there  any  terror  of  violating  your 


122  SELECT  SPEECHES    OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

oaths  ?  Be  ye  hypocrites,  or  does  genuine  religion  inspire  you? 
If  you  be  sincere — if  you  have  conscience — if  your  oaths  can 
control  your  interests,  then  Mr.  Magee  confidently  expects  an 
acquittal. 

If  amongst  you  there  be  cherished  one  ray  of  pure  religion — 
if  amongst  you  there  glow  a  single  spark  of  liberty — if  I  have 
alarmed  rehgion,  or  roused  the  spuit  of  freedom  in  one  breast 
amongst  you,  Mr.  Magee  is  safe,  and  his  country  is  served ;  but 
if  there  be  none — if  you  be  slaves  and  hypocrites,  he  will  await 
your  verdict,  and  despise  it. 


SPEECH  IN  THE  BEITISH  CATHOLIC  ASSOCLi- 
TION,  ON  THE  DEFEAT  OF  THE  EMANCIPATION 
BILL,  MAY  26,  1825. 


The  measure  of  which  we  complained  is  of  too  recent  a  date, 
the  injury  wliich  we  have  sustained  is  yet  too  fi'esh,  too  gall- 
ing in  its  effects,  to  allow  my  reason  to  assume  the  ascendant 
over  my  feelings,  and  to  give  my  judgment  time  to  operate  on, 
and  influence  the  tenor  of  my  reflections.  I  shall  neverthe- 
less be  as  respectful  in  my  allusions,  and  as  moderate  in  the 
remarks  I  have  to  offer,  as  the  overboihng  fervency  of  my 
Irish  blood  will  permit.  By  rejecting  that  bill  which  the 
Commons  had  sent  up  to  them  for  their  concurrence  and  ap- 
proval, the  House  of  Lords  has  inflicted  a  vital  injury  on  the 
stabiUty  of  Enghsh  power,  and  on  Irish  feelings  and  Irish 
honesty.  They,  however,  would  not  be  cast  down  by  that 
injury.  The  Cathohcs  were  sometimes  in  derision  termed  "  Ro- 
man." I  am  a  Catholic,  and  proud  am  I  to  say  that  in  one 
thing  at  least  I  am  a  Boman — I  never  will  despair.  But  on 
what  is  this  boastful  assertion  founded  ?  Why  should  I  say 
that  which  I  feel  has  not  reason  or  sound  policy  to  support  it? 
Where  now,  I  would  ask,  is  there  a  rational  hope  for  a  Catho- 
lic ?  Where  shall  I  look  for  consolation  under  the  present 
great  and  serious  disapiDointment ?  Am  I  to  look  back? 
Alas  !  there  is  nothing  cheering  in  the  events  which  have  for 


ON  THE  DEFEAT  OF  THE  EMANCIPATION  BILL.  123 

some  time  past  met  us  on  the  way  to  success  and  daslied  our 
hopes  to  the  earth.  Does  history  furnish  any  gi-ounds  for 
the  supposition  that  those  who  have  been  found  incapable  of 
maintaining  their  phghted  faith,  and  preserving  the  terms  of 
a  great  national  contract,  will  now,  in  the  hour  of  success,  be 
induced  to  yield  any  reason,  any  inducement  to  us  to  proceed 
in  the  course  we  have  adopted  ?  Is  this,  I  would  ask,  the  ex- 
ample the  Ii'ish  Cathohcs  gave,  when  they  had  on  two  occa- 
sions come  into  power  ?  Did  they,  in  the  reign  of  Mary,  seek 
by  retahation  to  avenge  the  blood  of  their  slaughtered  ances- 
tors ?  No  !  thank  God,  they  did  not !  and  that  at  least  was 
one  triumphant  consideration.  Not  one  drop  of  Protestant 
blood  had  been  shed — not  one  particle  of  Protestant  property 
had  been  then  sacrificed.  In  the  reign  of  James  II.  the 
Cathohcs  again  came  into  power,  and  their  conduct  was 
marked  by  the  same  spirit  of  forbearance.  I  have  heard  it 
justly  stated  in  the  House  of  Commons — no,  I  must  not  say 
that,  but  I  saw  it  in  the  newspapers,  in  the  powerful  speech  of 
Mr.  Twiss,  which  was  distinguished  alike  for  vigor  of  thought, 
strength  of  reasoning,  and  historical  accuracy,  that  in  the 
reign  of  James  there  were  but  fourteen  Protestants  in  the 
House  of  Commons,  and  eight  or  ten  in  the  House  of  Lords ; 
the  rest  were  Cathohcs.  Were  Protestants  excluded  from  it 
by  law?  No,  the  people  retui'ned  both  Protestants  and  Catho- 
lics ;  and  no  one  then  stood  up  to  say  that  a  man  should  not 
be  permitted  to  sit  ia  X3arliament  unless  he  heard  Mass  and 
attended  auricular  confession.  No,  no,  it  was  left  to  their 
enemies  to  say  that  Cathohcs  should  not  be  admitted  there, 
for  the  sacrifice  of  the  Mass  was  impious  and  idolatrous. 

[Mr.  O'Connell  then  attended  to  a  statement  made  by  Mr.  Daw- 
son, who  thought  fit  to  attribute  persecution  to  the  Irish  Catholics 
in  the  reign  of  the  second  James,  on  the  authority  of  Archbishop 
King,  who  was  refuted  by  Kev.  Dr.  LesHe,  and  yet,  iu  1825,  is 
quoted  in  jDarhament  to  convict  the  Catholics  of  Ireland.  He  next 
entered  into  a  brief  history  and  defence  of  the  Irish  Catholic  Asso- 
ciation, and  reprobated  the  penal  act  which  extinguished  that  body.] 

I  call  on  the  Catholics  of  England  to  co-operate  with  those 
of  Ireland  for  the  repeal  of  this  act,  for  it  is  a  step  to  return 


124  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF    DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

to  tlie  old  penal  law ;  and  liow  can  I  tell  the  people  of  Ireland 
they  ought  to  be  tranquil,  and  not  ferment  in  their  hearts  that 
black  stuff  which  makes  political  discontent  mischievous — that 
fire  suppressed,  that  explodes  only  the  more  dangerously  on 
account  of  the  compression  that  has  withheld  it  ?  How  can 
I  tell  the  people  of  Ireland  to  hope,  when  they  see  this  un- 
principled, disastrous  measure  has  been  adopted  ?  I  confess 
rdo  find  ground  for  hope  in  the  things  called  arguments  which 
are  employed  against  us,  if  I  had  not  seen  any  in  the  records 
of  ancient  history,  in  the  violation  of  treaties,  and  the  recent 
case  of  the  suppression  of  the  Cathohc  Association.  I  begin 
with  the  first  in  dignity,  the  keeper  of  the  King's  English  con- 
science ;  for  the  King,  my  lord,  has  three  consciences — he  has 
an  English  conscience,  and  the  keeper  of  it  is  a  hberal,  and 
turns  to  the  liberal  side  of  it ;  he  has  an  Ii-ish  conscience,  and 
I  hope  the  keeper  of  it  wiU  very  soon  be  a  hberal  person,  and 
he  will  turn  to  the  liberal  side  of  it ;  and  his  Majesty,  my  lord, 
has  a  Hanoverian  conscience ;  that  conscience  is  in  his  own 
keeping ;  it  has  no  contradicting  colors  or  differing  sides — it 
is  all  liberahty  and  justice.  Who  cannot  see  that  the  guilt  of 
refusing  that  to  us  which  the  King  personally  gives  to  his 
Hanoverian  subjects,  lies  in  the  miserable  machinery  of  a 
boroughmongering  administration,  which  prevents  the  King 
from  doing  justice  to  all  ? 

There  were  two  other  objections  against  us.  I  thank  the 
quarter  from  which  they  come  :  I  thank  him  sincerely  for  the 
first  of  them,  for  I  must  unaffectedly  admit  its  truth  and  jus- 
tice, and  I  will  abide  the  event  of  it  fairly.  It  was  this — if 
you  emancipate  the  CathoHcs,  said  the  Lord  Chancellor,  you 
must  equally  give  hberty  of  conscience  to  all  classes  of  Dissent- 
ers. I  thank  you  heartily,  my  Lord  Eldon;  that  is  exactly 
what  we  say ;  our  petition  is  that ; — we  do  not  come  before 
parliament,  making  a  comparison  of  theological  doctrines  :  we 
revere  our  own  ;  we  are  not  indifferent  to  them  ;  we  know  their 
awful  importance,  but  we  say  hberty  of  conscience  is  a 
sacred  right.  [A  voice  from  the  crowd :  "  You  have  it."] 
I  thank  the  gentleman  whose  voice  I  hear.  You,  my  Lord 
Duke,  possess  liberty  of  conscience.  Ai'e  you  not  the  pre- 
mier peer  of  England — could  any  one  deprive  you  of  that 


ON  THE  DEFEAT  OF  THE   EMANCIPATION  BILL.  125 

right  ?  Could  the  King  upon  his  throne,  or  the  Chancellor  on 
his  bench,  make  any  decree  against  it,  if  your  conscience  per- 
mitted ?  There  is  such  a  hberty  of  conscience  as  that  alluded 
to  in  Spain,  where  every  man  is  at  hberty  to  be  of  the  religion 
of  the  ruling  power ;  but  now  that  Ferdinand  is  returned,  no 
man  is  allowed  to  dissent  from  that  rehgion ;  and  let  me  not 
be  brought  to  prefer  the  Cortes  to  him.  They  trod  upon  the 
Church,  and  threw  away  the  people,  and  deserved  to  lose  their 
power.  The  Dissenters  have  it  not,  for  neither  Smith,  of  Nor- 
wich, nor  Wilks,  the  Secretary  of  that  excellent  Association  for 
Liberty  of  Conscience  (who  published  in  their  own,  my  creed  on 
that  subject),  they  could  not  fill  an  office  in  any  corporation,  for 
the  moment  they  were  proposed,  the  opposite  candidate  would 
tell  them,  "  You  have  not  taken  the  sacramental  test,"  and  the 
election  would  be  void,  and  the  candidate  who  had  fewest 
votes  would  be  returned.  This  was  good  and  fair  reason  to 
hope  that  the  principle  is  calculated,  in  spite  of  miserable  big- 
otry and  individual  acrimony,  to  make  its  way  all  over  Eng- 
land, The  hberal  portion  of  the  Dissenters  are  with  ns.  I 
find,  therefore,  reason  to  hope.  Liberty  of  conscience  is  our 
principle,  and  even  in  despair  I  would  retain  it ;  for  I  am  con- 
fident that  force  may  make  hypocrites,  but  not  true  behevers — 
it  may  compel  outward  profession,  but  it  is  not  in  man's  power 
to  change  the  heart ;  and  because  I  know  that  force  is  always 
resorted  to  by  him  that  thinks  he  has  the  worst  of  the  argu- 
ment. But,  for  my  part,  being  conscientiously  convinced  of 
the  superiority  of  the  CathoHc  religion  over  every  other — and 
putting  it  to  this  awful  test  of  sincerity,  that  I  know  an  eter- 
nity depends  upon  it — with  that  awful  conviction,  all  I  ask  of 
my  Protestant  brethren,  who  beheve  their  own  religion  to  be 
the  best,  is,  that  they  would  give  the  same  practical  proof  of 
then'  conviction  of  its  superiority.  Let  them  give  their  reli- 
gion what  I  ask  for  mine — a  clear  stage  and  no  favor,  and  let 
the  advantage  be  decided  by  conscientious  men  and  the  will 
of  the  eternal  God. 

Another  argument  of  the  Lord  Chancellor  was — it  seemed, 
indeed,  rather  a  word  than  an  argument — that  this  was  a  Pro- 
testant constitution,  and  the  words  "  Protestant  constitution  " 
came  out  very  frequently.    This  was  rather  an  assertion  than  an 


126  SELECT   SPEECHES   OF    DANIEL   O'CONNELL. 

argument,  and  it  lias  this  defect  as  an  assertion,  that  it  happens, 
mj  lord,  not  to  be  true.  There  are  four  descendants  amongst 
the  Cathohc  nobihty  of  the  day  of  the  barons  who  extorted 
Magna  Charta  from  a  tyrant.  It  was  Catholics  who  instituted 
the  hereditary  succession  in  the  House  of  Lords  as  a  separate 
House  :  it  was  Catholics  who  instituted  the  representation  of 
the  people  in  the  House  of  Commons :  it  was  Catholics  who 
instituted  trial  by  jury,  standing  as  a  shield  between  the  peo- 
ple and  power,  making  the  administration  of  the  law  a  domes- 
tic concern,  and  preventing  any  man  giving  a  false  and  flagi- 
tious verdict  to-day  in  favor  of  despotism,  lest  he  himself  should 
be  the  victim  the  next.  Are  not  these  ingredients  in  the  con- 
stitution ?  I  would  not  forget  the  treason  law  of  Edward  HI., 
which  is  the  perfection  of  wisdom  in  that  respect,  for  many 
and  many  a  victim  would  have  been  sent  to  premature  death 
and  destruction  but  for  the  advantage  of  that  Catholic  statute 
of  EdAvard  HI. ;  and  whenever  despotism  has  ruled  over  this 
country,  the  first  step  that  has  been  taken,  from  time  to  time, 
and  it  was  one  which  immediately  followed  the  Eeformation, 
was  to  repeal  that  Cathohc  statute,  and  deprive  the  people  of 
its  benefits.  We  have  it  now;  but  though  we  have  it  now 
through  its  being  restored  by  a  Protestant  parliament,  it  was 
drawn  up  by  Catholic  hands,  it  was  passed  by  Catholic  votes, 
it  was  signed  by  a  Cathohc  King,  and  will  Lord  Eldon  tell  me 
that  the  treason  law,  the  trial  by  jury,  the  House  of  Lords, 
and  the  office  of  Chancellor,  too,  are  no  portions  of  this  Pro- 
testant constitution  ?  If  that  office  did  not  exist,  I  suspect 
that  the  Protestantism  of  the  Chancellor  would  not  be  so 
extremely  vivid  as  it  is  at  present.  The  seals  he  bears,  the 
mace  which  is  carried  before  him,  were  borne  by,  and  carried 
before  many  and  many  a  Catholic  bishop  ;  and  the  first  lay- 
man who  held  them  was  the  martyred  Sir  Thomas  More,  who, 
as  it  was  well  said  in  parliament,  left  the  office  with  ten  pounds 
in  his  pocket ;  a  Catholic  example  to  the  present  Protestant 
Chancellor. 

Protestant  constitution !  "What  is  it,  if  money  be  not  one  of 
the  valuable  concerns  of  the  constitution  ?  Will  the  Chancel- 
lor say  it  is  not  ?  If  the  constitution  be  Protestant,  let  the 
Protestants  pay  the  tithes  and  the  taxes ;  let  them  pay  the 


ON  THE  DEFEAT  OF  THE  EMANCIPATION  BILL.  127 

church  rates  and  the  Grand  Jury  cess  for  us  in  Ireland.  If 
it  be  a  Protestant  constitution  let  it  be  so  entirely  :  let  us  not 
have  to  fight  then-  battles  or  pay  their  taxes.  This  is  the  ad- 
mii'able  and  inimitable  equity  of  the  Lord  Chancellor.  Here 
is  the  keeper  of  a  conscience  for  you  !  Here  is  a  distributor 
of  equity.  It  shall  be  Protestant  to  the  extent  of  everything 
that  is  valuable  and  useful :  to  the  extent  of  everytliing  that 
is  rewarding  and  dignified  ;  for  every  place  of  emolument  and 
authority,  and  everything  that  elevates  a  man,  and  is  the 
recompense  of  legitimate  ambition.  To  this  extent  it  shall  be 
Protestant ;  but  for  the  burdens  of  the  state — for  the  shedding 
of  human  blood  in  defence  of  the  throne — for  all  that  bears 
on  a  man,  even  to  the  starvation  of  his  family  by  the  weight 
of  taxation  which  so  few  are  able  to  pay  in  this  country,  and 
by  which  so  many  have  been  reduced  to  poverty  in  Ireland 
(for  have  I  not  seen  the  miserable  blanket,  and  the  single  po- 
tato pot,  sold  by  the  tax-gatherer  in  my  native  country?)  Oh, 
shall  I,  I  say,  be  told  that  for  all  that  is  useful  the  constitu- 
tion shall  be  Protestant,  and  that  it  shall  cease  to  be  so  the 
moment  there  is  an}i;hiug  of  oppression,  money-making, 
grinding,  or  taxation  ?  Is  it  just  to  take  the  entke  value  and 
give  no  valuable  consideration  in  return  ?  Is  it  just  to  accept 
labor  and  pay  no  wages  ?  Is  this  equity  in  the  High  Coui't 
of  Chancery?  From  your  tribunal  I  appeal  to  the  living 
God,  who  shall  judge  us  aU,  and  in  his  presence  I  proclaim 
the  foul  iniquity,  the  barefaced  injustice  of  loading  us  with 
aU  the  bmxlens  of  the  state,  and  keeping  us  from  its  advan- 
tages. 

After  the  Chancellor  I  would  refer  to  the  speech  of  a  right 
Reverend  Bishop,  which  was  said  to  have  been  sonorous,  mu- 
sical and  well  delivered — highly  pleasing  to  his  party.  It 
reminded  him  of  a  story  told  by  Addison,  who  heard  a  lady 
in  a  carriage  utter  a  loud  scream,  and  supposing  her  suffering 
under  some  violence  or  injury,  inquired  what  was  the  matter, 
and  was  told  nothing ;  but  the  lady  had  been  ,told  she  had  a 
fine  voice,  and  had  been  showing  it  by  screaming.  She  only 
wished  to  make  an  exhibition.  The  bishop,  too,  was  only 
screaming,  and  had  formerly  screamed  the  other  way.  The 
first  part  of  his  speech,  as  I  read  it  in  the  newspaper,  was  a 


128  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  o'CONNELL. 

good  essay  on  disinterestedness  !  We  were  called,  interested, 
selfish ;  but  would  the  Eight  Reverend  Bishop  explain  how 
it  was  that  he  had  formerly  been  favorably  disposed  towards 
the  Cathohcs,  till  he  became  tutor  to  the  Earl  of  Liverpool's 
nephew,  and  that  then  all  at  once  a  change  was  effected  in  his 
mind.  He  is  young — there  are  a  great  many  other  bishops, 
and  he  was  certainly  fortunate  in  his  chance,  for  he  adopted, 
if  not  a  better,  yet  more  enriching  faith.  It  might  be  by  a 
miracle — for  a  Protestant  bishop  might  work  miracles  as  well 
as  Prince  Hohenlohe — it  might  be  by  a  miracle,  that  the  new 
light  broke  in  on  the  bishop  just  at  the  right  time ;  that  he 
was  kept  in  darkness  to  a  certain  hour,  and  then  was  suddenly 
made  to  see  the  danger,  and  to  turn  from  a  friend  to  an  ene- 
my. I  have  no  objection  to  fair  enmity,  but  the  Bishop  of 
Chester's  enmity  was  not  fair.  In  his  speech  he  had  quoted  a 
part  of  a  speech  of  Doctor  Dromgoole ;  I  believe,  too,  from 
what  I  recollect,  that  the  bishop  quoted  an  exaggerated  ver- 
sion, and  he  stated  that  this  speech  had  been  approved  of  by 
the  Catholic  Association,  and  by  all  the  Catholic  priests,  and 
at  Home.  I  heard  this  with  great  astonishment,  for,  in  fact, 
Doctor  Dromgoole's  speech  was  the  only  one  I  ever  recollect- 
ed which  had  been  condemned  at  a  pubhc  meeting. 

It  had  been  pronounced  late  in  the  evening.  I  was  not 
present,  or  the  sun  would  not  have  gone  down  on  it  unre- 
proved — and  on  the  next  day  an  extraordinary  meeting  of  the 
CathoHc  Board  was  summoned,  and  the  speech  condemned. 
He  called  the  Protestant  faith  a  novelty,  and  it  was  stated  to 
him  that  whatever  opinions  he  chose  to  discuss  among  theolo- 
gians, he  must  not  insult  the  Protestants.  Where  the  Bishop 
of  Chester  learned  that  this  speech  had  been  approved  of  at 
Borne,  I  do  not  know,  but  I  suppose  it  might  be  by  the  same 
vivacity  of  fancy,  and  the  same  energy  of  imagination  from 
which  he  learned  that  the  speech  had  been  approved  of  in  Ire- 
land. I  arraign  him  of  inventing  it.  If  the  Catholic  bishops 
who  were  examined  before  the  lords, — if  Doctor  Murray,  the 
sanctity  of  whose  life  was  displayed  in  the  suavity  of  his 
manners,  and  who  was  the  mildest  of  aU  Christians — if  Doc- 
tor Doyle,  whose  understanding  was  as  vigorous  as  his  man- 
ners were  simple,  who  possessed  an  exhaustless  store  of  know- 


ON  THE  DEFEAT  OF  THE  EMANCIPATION  BILL.  129 

ledge,  and  whose  gigantic  intellect  could  readily  convey  them, 
to  the  mind  of  every  other  man — if  these  prelates  in  their  ex- 
amination had  invented  anything  like  this  against  the  Protes- 
tants, though  he  revered  them  as  the  representatives  of  those 
Christian  bishops  who  had  first  estabhshed  the  Catholic  Faith 
in  Ii'eland ;  if  the  Lord  Bishop  of  Chester  could  point  out  to 
him  anything  in  their  evidence  similar  to  the  invention  he  had 
alluded  to,  I  wiU  at  once  brand  them  as  calumniators.  I  will 
not  say  anything  of  this  kind  to  the  Bishop  of  Chester,  be- 
cause  I  (io  not  belong  to  the  same  church  with  him ;  but  if  he 
will  point  out  to  me  anything  so  false  in  their  evidence,  I  will 
teU  the  Irish  bishops  they  are  Hars  and  calumniators,  and 
that  they  have  broken  the  commandment,  for  they  had  borne 
false  witness  against  their  neighbor.  I  would,  however,  say 
no  more  of  the  Bishop  of  Chester's  speech,  but  if  any  more 
positive  proof  of  its  error  were  wanting,  he  had  only  to  turn 
over  the  Dublin  Evening  Post  for  half  an  hour,  and  he  would 
find  the  whole  proceedings  of  the  meeting  at  which  Dr. 
Dromgoole's  speech  was  censured. 

[Mr.  O'Connell  here  took  occasion  to  eulogize  Mr.  Canning,  Mr. 
Plunkett  and  Mr.  Brownlow,  and  contrasted  the  conduct  of  the 
latter  with  that  of  the  Marquis  of  Anglesea.] 

The  contrast  I  was  going  to  offer,  and  that  which  would 
alone  make  us  despair,  if  I  did  not  know  my  countrymen  bet- 
ter, is  that  of  the  noble  and  gallant  deserter,  the  Marquis  of 
Anglesea.  He  said,  now  was  the  time  to  fight.  But,  most  no- 
ble Marquis,  we  are  not  going  to  fight  at  aU,  and  above  all 
things,  most  noble  Marquis,  we  are  not  going  to  fight  now,  un- 
der favor.  This  may  be  your  time  to  fight — you  may  want  us 
to  fight  ere  long  with  you,  as  you  wanted  us  before — ^j^our 
glories,  and  your  medals,  and  your  dignities,  and  your  titles, 
were  bought  by  the  young  blood  of  Catholic  Ireland.  We 
fought.  Marquis  of  Anglesea,  and  you  know  it  well — we  fought, 
and  you  are  Marquis ;  if  we  had  not  fought  with  you,  your 
island  of  Anglesea  would  ere  this  have  shrunk  into  a  cabbage 
garden.  And  where  would  now  have  been  the  mighty  con- 
queror of  Europe  :  he,  who  had  talent  to  command  victory,  and 
judgment  to  look  for  services,  and  not  creeds  to  reward  men 


130  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL   O'CONNELL. 

for  merits,  and  not  for  professions  of  faith ;  where  would  he 
have  been  if  Ireland  had  not  stood  by  you  ?  I  myself  have 
worn,  not  only  the  trappings  of  woe,  but  the  emblems  of  sin- 
cere mourning,  for  more  than  one  gallant  relative  of  mine 
who  have  shed  their  blood  under  your  commands.  We  can 
fight — we  will  fight  when  England  wants  us.  But  we  will  not 
fight  against  her  at  present,  and  I  trust  we  will  not  fight  for  her 
at  all  until  she  does  us  justice. 

But,  most  noble  Marquis,  though  your  soldiers  fought  gal- 
lantly and  well  with  you,  in  a  war  which  they  were  told  was 
just  and  necessary,  are  you  quite  sure  the  soldiers  will  fight  in 
a  crusade  against  the  unarmed  and  wretched  peasantry  of  Ire- 
land ?  Your  speech  is  published ;  it  will,  when  read  in  Ar- 
magh, and  the  neighboring  counties,  give  joy,  and  will  be  cel- 
ebrated in  the  next  Orange  procession ;  and  again,  as  before, 
CathoUc  blood  will  be  shed ;  but  most  noble  Marquis,  the 
earth  has  not  covered  all  the  blood  that  has  been  so  shed  ;  it 
cries  yet  for  vengeance  to  heaven,  and  not  to  man  ;  that  blood 
may  jet  bring  on  an  unfortunate  hour  of  retribution  ;  and  if'it 
do,  what  have  you  to  fight  with?  Count  you  on  a  gallant 
army  ?  There  are  English  gentry  amongst  its  officers,  the 
sons  and  descendants  of  those  who  wielded  the  sword  for  lib- 
erty, never  to  strike  down  to  slavery  their  fellow  men.  Eng- 
lish chivahy  will  not  join  with  you,  most  noble  Marquis  of 
Anglesea  :  and  though  you  have  deserted  her  and  taken  the 
prudent  side  of  the  Commander-in-Chief,  yet,  gallant  Marquis, 
I  think  you  have  reckoned  without  your  host. 

Let  me  tell  you  this  story,  sir.  I  am  but  an  humble  indi- 
vidual. It  happened  to  me,  not  many  months  ago,  to  be  going 
through  England ;  my  family  were  in  a  carriage,  on  the  box  of 
which  I  was  placed  ;  there  came  up  on  the  road,  eight  or  ten 
sergeants  and  corporals,  with  two  hundred  and  fifty  recruits. 
I  perceived  at  once  the  countenances  of  my  unfortunate  coun- 
trymen laughing  as  they  went  along,  for  no  other  reason  than 
because  they  were  alive.  They  saw  me,  and  some  of  them 
recognized  me ;  they  instantly  burst  from  their  sergeants  and 
corporals,  formed  around  my  carriage,  and  gave  me  three 
cheers,  most  noble  Marquis.  "Well,  may  God  bless  them, 
wherever  they  are,  poor  fellows!     Oh,  you  reckon  without 


ON  THE  DEFEAT  OF  THE  EMANCIPATION  BILL.  131 

jovr  host,  let  me  tell  you,  when  you  think  that  a  British  army 
will  trample  on  a  set  of  petitioners  for  their  rights — beggars 
for  a  little  charity,  who  are  looking  up  to  you  with  eyes  lifted, 
and  hands  bent  down.  You  will  not  fight  us  now,  most  noble 
Marquis ;  and  let  me  tell  you,  if  the  battle  comes,  you  shall 
not  have  the  choice  of  your  position  either. 

But  though  he  is  an  excellent  soldier,  the  Marquis  is  a  spe- 
cial bad  logician — no  blame  to  him ;  for,  in  the  same  speech, 
he  said  he  was  still  for  Catholic  emancipation,  and  would  re- 
turn to  us  as  soon  as  he  was  certain  that  emancipation  was 
consistent  with  Protestant  ascendency.  Ascendency  forsooth ! 
Catholic  emancipation  supposes  universal  equalization  of  civil 
eligibility,  and  it  cannot  consist  with  the  ascendency  of  any 
party.  The  Marquis  is  ready  to  open  the  window  to  us  as 
soon  as  ho  is  sure  the  sun  will  not  shine  through  it.  I  am  not 
afraid  of  his  sword.  Still  less  do  I  feel  in  peril  from  his  logic. 
The  King  of  Prussia,  when  the  Saxons  left  him,  one  fine  morn- 
ing, said,  "  Let  them  go  against  us,  it  is  better  that  all  the  en- 
emy should  be  together,  and  all  our  friends  together  also." 
I  make  a  present  of  you,  to  our  opponents,  most  noble  Mar- 
quis. Him  who  thus  deserted  us,  and  hallooed  in  the  ranks  of 
those  whose  cry  was  rehgious  dissensions, — him  have  I  con- 
trasted with  the  true  genuine  Protestant  Christian,  who,  firm 
in  his  own  opinion,  was  the  enemy  of  the  Catholics,  so  long  as 
he  beheved  them  to  be  the  enemies  of  hberty,  rehgious  and 
civil ;  but  who,  the  moment  he  was  convinced  that  they  were 
equally  its  friends  ar,  himself,  became  our  supporter,  and  set  the 
glorious  golden  example  of  a  perfect  sacrifice  of  all  that  Httle 
pride  and  jealousy  which  attach  to  a  change  of  genuine  opin- 
ion— ^him  have  I  contrasted  with  Mr.  Brownlow,  who,  be  it 
ever  remembered,  stood  by  no  Commander-in-Chief,  and  who 
can  only  expose  himself  in  injury  and  expense,  by  a  sacrifice 
to  principles  which  the  Marquis  of  Angelsea  may  admire,  but 
cannot  afford  possibly  to  imitate. 

[Mr.  O'Connell  then  proceeded  to  panegyrize  the  pubHc  exer- 
tions of  Sir  Francis  Burdett,  Lord  Nugent,  and  the  Earl  of  Don- 
oughmore  ;  and  passed  some  severe  sarcasms  on  Sir  T.  Lethbridge 
and  Mr.  Banks,  senior.] 


132  SELECT  SPEECHES   OF  DAKIEL    o'CONNELL. 

There  was  one  speech  more  on  which  I  will  say  a  few 
words — it  was  the  speech  of  Lord  Liverpool.  I  have  never 
read  a  polemical  speech  of  the  noble  lord  till  that.  The  noble 
lord  seemed  to  have  been  employed  in  a  manner  quite  becom- 
ing a  great  statesman ;  disregarding  the  course  which  our 
ancient  enemy,  France,  was  pursuing :  not  thinking  that  she 
was  daily  increasing  her  armies — that  she  was  creating  an  effi- 
cient navy — that  she  was  rapidly  paying  off  her  debt — that 
titheless  France  was  daily  improving  her  resources,  and  get- 
ting rid  of  the  burdens  which  the  war  had  left  on  her — that 
she  was  building  a  large  class  of  frigates,  and  appeared  as  if 
inclined,  on  some  fit  opportunity,  to  dispute  with  us  once  more 
the  empire  of  the  seas.  Of  all  these  facts  the  noble  lord 
seemed  heedless ;  they  were  perhaps  beneath  the  notice  of  his 
great  mind.  He  did  not  calculate  on  the  rising  generation  of 
America,  that  country  in  which  alone  the  Lish  CathoHc  has 
fair  play.  He  did  not  appear  to  consider  in  what  time  a  west- 
erly wind,  which  would  shut  us  up  in  the  channel,  would  waft 
a  fleet  to  the  shores  of  Ireland,  perhaps  at  some  period  of  dis- 
tress and  discontent,  when  arms  and  not  men  might  be  want- 
ing. All  these  were  subjects  below  the  consideration  of  Lord 
Liverpool's  great  mind.  He  was  busied  with  one  of  much 
greater  importance  to  the  state.  He  was  engaged  in  polemi- 
cal discussions  about  auricular  confession  and  penance,  and 
the  mode  of  administering  the  sacrament ;  and  as  the  result  of 
his  studies  in  those  important  matters,  he  poured  forth  a  rich 
and  luscious  discourse  on  an  admiring  audience.  Li  the 
course  of  that  speech,  the  noble  lord  read  the  House  of  Com- 
mons no  very  gentle  lecture  for  having  presumed  to  send  up 
such  a  biU.  Here  was  another  reformer.  It  had  been  said, 
perhaps  untruly,  that  the  great  majority  of  the  House  were 
sent  into  their  places  by  several  members  of  the  Peers  :  if  that 
were  true,  it  might  perhaps  account  for  the  scolding  given  for 
having  passed  a  bill  not  approved  by  their  masters.  Be  that 
however  as  it  might,  the  House  of  Commons  were  scolded — 
perhaps  they  deserved  it.  The  noble  lord  had  expressed  an 
opinion,  that  the  religion  of  several  millions  of  his  fellow-sub- 
jects was  such,  as  to  render  them  unfit  for  the  enjoyment  of 
civil  rights  to  the  same  extent  as  the  Protestant.     What  new 


I 


ON  THE  DEFEAT   OF  THE  EMANCIPATION  BILL.  133 

light  was  it  tliat  broke  upon  the  noble  Earl's  mind,  so  as  to 
produce  this  impression,  so  opposite  to  that  which  he  seemed 
to  feel  only  one  year  before  ? 

The  noble  Earl  appeared  to  hold  a  very  different  opinion  of 
the  Irish  people  last  year.  On  the  8th  of  April,  1824,  he  was 
reported  to  have  said  in  his  place  in  the  House,  speaking  of 
the  Irish,  "  that  whatever  they  may  be  in  their  own  country, 
I  say  of  them  in  this,  that  there  does  not  exist,  on  the  face  of 
the  globe,  a  more  industrious,  a  more  honest,  or  more  kindly- 
disposed  people."  Surely  they  have  not  changed  their  reli- 
gion since  then ;  and  if,  in  1824,  that  rehgion  could  make  them 
"honest,  industrious,  and  kindly-disposed,"  why  should  it  be 
urged  as  a  ground  for  exclusion  from  the  fuU  enjoyment  of  the 
rights  of  British  subjects  in  1825  ?  What  other  use  would  a 
statesman  make  of  reUgion  but  to  instill  n^orahty  and  public 
order  ?  The  noble  Earl  went  on  in  the  same  speech  to  say,  "  I 
think  it  material  to  bear  this  testimony  in  their  favor,  because 
whatever  may  be  the  evils  of  Ireland,  and  from  whatever 
source  they  may  proceed,  it  is  impossible  for  any  man  to  ima- 
gine that  they  arise  from  any  defect  in  the  people.  "We  may 
boldly  assert  that  it  is  impossible  to  find  a  more  valuable  class 
of  people  in  any  country  in  the  world."  And  yet  it  was  this 
most  valuable  class  of  persons  that  the  noble  Earl  in  his  late 
address  would  condemn  to  eternal  exclusion  from  the  full 
benefits  of  the  constitution.  Did  the  noble  Earl  imagine  that 
the  driveUing  nonsense  of  Dr.  Duigenan,  which  he  had  kept 
bottled  up  for  seven  or  eight  years,  and  now  drew  forth  to 
treat  the  British  nation,  would  drive  a  people  such  as  he  had 
described  from  their  purpose?  Let  the  honest  lord  stand 
forth  and  defend  his  consistency.  He  had  made  that  speech 
from  which  he  had  just  given  the  extract  in  1824 ;  the  second 
speech  was  made  in  1825.  In  the  interim  the  Duke  of  York 
had  made  his  declaration  of  eternal  hostility  to  the  great  ques- 
tion of  emancipation.  The  Bishop  of  Chester  was  not  the 
only  convert  which  that  speech  had  made.  The  noble  Earl,  to 
use  a  vulgar  adage,  "knew  how  the  cat  jumped."  Oh,  my 
Lord  Duke,  with  what  pleasure  will  this  speech  of  my  Lord 
Liverpool  and  that  of  his  Eoyal  Highness  of  York  be  received 
at  the  meeting  of  the  aUied  Sovereigns— those  mighty  despots 


134  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

■who,  tyrannical  as  they  are,  still  respect  the  consciences  of 
their  subjects  ?  What  joy  will  they  not  feel  at  reading  this 
wise  effusion  of  England's  prime  minister  ?  They  will  hi  their 
hearts  say,  "  Let  it  go  forth,  it  will  work  for  our  views."  They 
win  add :  "  Kockites,  keep  your  spirits — 

Durate  et  vosmet  rebus  servate  secundis. 

Or,  as  CromweU  said,  "  '  Trust  in  the  Lord  and  rest  on  your 
pikes.'  Matters  are  going  on  in  the  way  that  you  and  we  and 
the  enemies  of  England's  peace  could  wish."  Such  would  be 
the  sentiments  of  aU  who  were  envious  of  England's  power, 
and  jealous  of  that  freedom  by  which  she  acquu*ed  it.  Theu- 
feelings  on  tliis  subject  would  not  be  less  gratified  when  they 
read,  if  they  could  beheve  it,  the  calculation  made  by  Mr. 
Leshe  Foster,  sho"VYing  that  the  population  of  Ireland  was  less 
by  two  mUhons  than  it  was  generally  considered.  That  hon- 
orable gentleman,  who  was  the  more  fit  to  be  the  head  peda- 
gogue of  a  large  school,  than  at  the  head  of  a  respectable 
county  (a  situation  by  the  way  in  which  the  votes  of  Cathohcs 
had  helped  to  placed  him),  had  come  to  parHament  with  his 
primer  and  his  multiphcation  table,  and  endeavored  to  show 
that  the  Cathohcs  of  Ireland  were  not  so  numerous  by  two 
milHons  as  was  generally  beheved.  He  began  by  counting  the 
number  of  children  that  attended  some  of  the  charity  schools, 
and  then  taking  the  number  of  parents  that  each  chUd  had, 
which  was  easy  to  ascertain ;  but  he  omitted  to  consider  how 
many  children  each  set  of  parents  had,  which  in  Ireland  might 
perhaps  be  more  difficult.  He  also  omitted  to  notice  the  num- 
ber of  children  that  never  attended  at  those  schools  ;  but  the 
result  of  his  calculation  was,  that  the  Catholics  were  less  by 
two  millions  than  theh  advocates  stated  them  to  be. 

I  have  heard  of  killing  off  by  computation  by  Captain  Bo- 
badil ;  but  this  beat  Bobadil  quite  out.  However,  the  error 
was  not  too  gross  for  the  party  to  which  it  was  addressed,  for 
the  noble  Earl  swallowed  it,  Bobadil  and  all.  What,  I  beg 
calmly  to  ask,  would  be  the  effect  of  the  noble  lord's  denun- 
ciation of  perpetual  exclusion,  upon  the  four  of  five  mOlions 
of  Cathohcs  which  Mr.  Leslie  Foster  had  left  ?  (for  he  would 
admit  for  the  moment  that  they  were  reduced  two  milhons 


ON   TEE  DEFEAT  OF  THE  EMANCIPATION  BILL.  135 

without  the  aid  of  Lord  Anglesea's  broadsword.)  They  were 
told  they  could  not  be  free  while  the  Protestant  church  estab- 
lishment existed,  for  that  their  entire  emancipation  was  incom- 
patible with  the  safety  of  that  estabhshment,  was  this  not  in 
effect  putting  every  man,  woman  and  child  of  the  five  millions 
of  Catholics  in  hostility  to  that  church?  I  beg  most  dis- 
tinctly to  deny  the  justice  of  the  assumption  on  which  this 
argument  of  exclusion  was  founded.  The  Cathohcs  did  not 
wish  to  see  the  Protestant  church  subverted.  I  would  solemn- 
ly declare,  that  I  would  rather  perish  than  see  the  Protestant 
church  subverted  and  my  own  church  substituted  in  its  place. 

[The  learned  gentleman,  after  adverting  to  the  petitions  from 
England  in  favor  of  a  repeal  of  the  assessed  taxes,  which  amount- 
ed to  about  three  mUHons,  proceeded  to  observe,  that  that  sum  and 
much  more  might  be  saved  to  this  country,  by  merely  doing  an  act 
of  justice  to  the  Irish  people.] 

Ireland  now  costs  this  country  four  miUions  a  year  more 
than  her  revenue  produced.  Let  justice  be  done — let  peace 
and  content  be  brought  about  by  this  act  of  just  concession, 
and  Ireland,  instead  of  being  a  burden  to  England,  will  prove 
a  rich  source  of  wealth  and  strength  to  the  empire.  Capital 
will  flow  into  the  country,  her  resources  for  its  employment 
would  become  known,  the  facilities  for  every  kind  of  com- 
merce which  her  ports  afforded  would  ensure  a  flow  of  wealth 
to  English  capitaUsts — the  only  persons  who  can  take  advan- 
tage of  them — an  advantage  which  they  were  deterred  from 
seeking  by  the  present  unsettled  state  of  the  country.  See 
what  sources  of  annoyance,  of  war  and  bloodshed  Wales 
and  Scotland  were,  until  they  were  incorporated  in  one  gov- 
ernment with  England,  and  until  their  inhabitants  were  fully 
ac^mitted  to  all  the  advantages  of  the  constitution  as  Brit- 
ish subjects,  while  they  now  contribute  much  to  the  strength 
of  the  empire.  Why  should  not  the  same  attempt  be  made 
wdtli  respect  to  Ireland  ?  Is  she  to  be  forever  excluded  from 
the  full  benefits  of  the  constitution?  Before  I  conclude,  I 
beg  to  notice  a  paper  which  had  within  these  four  days  been 
circulated  with  great  assiduity  by  the  enemies  of  emancipa- 
tion.    One  of  those  papers  I  now  hold  in  my  hand.     It  called 


136  SELECT  SPEECHES    OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

on  all  friends  of  tlie  Protestant  religion  to  read  some  extracts 
wliich  it  contained  from  the  Journal  des  Debats,  and  to  pause 
before  they  gave  any  support  to  the  prayer  of  the  Cathohcs. 
I  w'-ji  briefly  state  the  nature  of  the  case  mentioned  in  the  ex- 
tracts, in  order  to  show  the  gross  injustice  of  founding  upon 
it  any  charge  against  the  Catholics.  In  the  department  of 
Aisne,  an  application  was  made  by  some  Protestants  for  the 
erection  of  a  Protestant  church  and  the  appointment  of  a 
minister  of  their  religion  to  officiate  in  it.  Now  by  the  law  of 
France  the  government  is  obliged  in  any  place  where  there  are 
five  hundred  Protestants  residing,  to  erect  a  church  for  them, 
and  to  provide  a  minister  to  ofliciate  in  it.  That  clergyman 
was  paid  one  hundred  pounds  a  year,  while  a  Cathohc  curate 
officiating  for  a  similar  number  of  Cathohcs,  received  only 
eighty  pounds  a  year.  The  reason  was,  that  a  Protestant 
clergyman  might  have  a  wife  to  maintain,  while  a  Cathohc 
had  not.  The  apphcation  was  refused,  not  because  it  was 
intended  to  discourage  the  Protestant  rehgion,  but  because  the 
number  of  Protestants  making  application  did  not  amount  to 
one  half  the  number  for  which  the  law  authorized  the  build- 
ing of  a  church — and  this  was  the  gross  instance  of  rehgious 
oppression  of  which  such  loud  complaints  were  heard  in  this 
country!  What  would  have  been  said  if  there  were  three 
hundred  Protestants  hving  in  one  parish  and  only  one  Catho- 
hc, and  that  those  three  hundred  were  not  only  obliged  to 
provide  a  place  of  worship  for  themselves,  but  also  to  build, 
at  their  entire  expense,  a  church  for  the  use  of  one  Catholic  ? 
Would  not  all  England  ring  with  outcries  against  the  injustice 
of  the  act?  And  yet  an  act  of  this  description,  with  the  ex- 
ception that  the  parties  were  placed  in  situations  the  reverse 
of  what  he  had  described,  had  just  occurred  in  Ii-eland. 

A  petition  was  a  short  time  ago  presented  to  the  House  of 
Commons,  from  three  hundred  Cathohc  inhabitants  of  a  parish 
in  Ireland,  the  name  of  which  would  sound  very  harsh  in  Eng- 
hsh  ears,  and  which  could  with  difficulty  be  pronounced  by 
Enghsh  Hps,  the  parish  of  Aghado.  The  petitioners  stated 
that  they  were  the  only  inhabitants  of  the  parish  except  one, 
and  that  one  was  a  Protestant ;  that  there  was  no  Protestant 
church  in  the  parish,  but  that  the  Protestant  inhabitant  had 


ON  THE  DEFEAT  OF  IHE  EJIANCIPATION  BILL.  137 

tlie  use  of  a  pew  in  a  neighboring  parish  church,  and  they 
complained  of  being  called  upon  to  bear  the  expense  of  build- 
ing a  church  for  that  one  Protestant.  What,  he  rep'^ted, 
would  have  been  said  if  the  petitioners  happened  to  be'i^o- 
testants,  and  the  one  inhabitant  a  Cathohc  ?  But  because 
they  were  Cathohcs,  it  was  passed  over  as  a  matter  of  course, 
and  not  a  word  was  heard  about  the  oppression  of  the  case. 

Another  subject  on  which  a  great  outcry  had  been  raised, 
was  lately  stated  in  a  French  journal,  the  Constitutionnel.  It 
appeared  that  a  church  at  Nerac  had  been  in  possession  of  a 
Protestant  congregation  since  1804.  This  church  had  origi- 
nally belonged  to  the  Convent  of  St.  Clare.  In  the  French 
revolution,  when  the  axe  and  the  guillotine  were  in  daily  use 
against  the  ministers  and  professors  of  religion,  the  nuns  were 
turned  out  upon  the  world,  and  the  convent  church  was  used 
as  a  storehouse.  In  this  situation  it  continued  until  1804, 
when  it  was  given  to  a  Protestant  congregation,  with  no  other 
title  of  gift  or  purchase  than  the  mere  proces  verbal  which  as- 
sented to  the  application  which  had  been  made  for  it.  Not 
long  back  the  Convent  of  St.  Clare  was  restored,  and  not  un- 
naturally, the  nuns  appHed  for  the  church  which  had  originally 
belonged  to  them.  A  regular  legal  proceeding  was  com- 
menced for  its  recovery,  and  the  members  of  the  Protestant 
congregation,  not  being  able  to  prove  a  good  title,  were 
obliged  to  give  it  up.  For  this,  however,  the  Times  and 
Chronicle,  and  other  hberal  journals,  were  quite  enraged ; 
their  very  types  seemed  to  fly  about  in  a  passion.  But  what 
was  there  in  the  case  to  call  for  such  angry  comment  ? 

It  was  said  that  the  cure  of  Nerac  made  use  of  some  very 
iUiberal  expressions  on  the  occasion  of  regaining  possession  ; 
if  he  did,  there  was  no  man  connected  with  the  Times  or 
Chronicle  who  would  more  readOy  condemn  any  such  expres- 
sion than  he  would.  Let  it,  however,  be  recollected,  that  the 
charge  made  was  the  charge  of  an  enemy.  It  was  made  hj  a 
party  of  the  old  Jacobin  school— of  those  whose  friends  had 
succeeded  in  overthrowing  the  altar  of  France  foi  a  time,  and 
now,  when  religion  was  restored,  would  wish  to  hold  up  its 
ministers  to  contempt  or  reproach.  I  think  the  charge,  coming 
fi'om  such  a  quarter,  ought  not  to  be  entitled  to  any  more 


138  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF    DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

weiglit  than  an  idle  calumny  wliicli  miglit  be  found  against 
liimself  in  the  John  Bull  of  this  town. 

Suppose  during  the  poAver  of  Cromwell — that  scriptm'al 
Christian,  with  texts  in  his  mouth  and  sword  in  his  hand — 
suppose  that  rough  commander  were  to  have  bestowed  a  Pro- 
testant church  on  a  Catholic  congregation  or  an  any  of  the 
various  sects  of  Christians  (I  speak  without  disrespect  of  any) 
which  swarmed  through  the  land  in  his  day,  and  suppose,  on 
the  restoration,  it  was  to  be  claimed,  and  a  legal  process  insti- 
tuted for  its  recovery,  would  the  decision  of  that  claim  in  favor 
of  the  original  owners,  be  a  proof  of  bigotry  or  oppression  in  the 
Church  of  England  ?  Why  then  should  that  be  culled  bigotry 
in  one  case,  which  would  be  an  act  of  justice  in  the  other  ? 
Talk  of  bigotry  in  France  from  Catholics  to  Protestants  !  In 
that  country  both  were  ahke  ehgible  to  places  of  trust  and 
power  in  the  state ;  but  whoever  heard  in  any  of  their  public 
assembhes — in  the  Chamber  of  Deputies — of  a  Lethbridge 
or  an  Inglis  getting  up  in  his  place  and  revihng  with  coarse 
epithets  the  religion  of  his  Protestant  fellow-subjects  ?  (By 
the  way,  I  intended  to  make  a  few  remarks  on  the  Index  Ex- 
purgatorius  of  Sir  H.  Inglis,  but  I  forgive  him.)  To  those 
who  talked  of  Catholic  bigotry  I  would  say,  let  the  Cathohcs 
of  this  country  be  placed  on  the  same  terms  of  equality  with 
their  Protestant  brethren,  as  the  Protestants  of  France  are, 
with  respect  to  their  Cathohc  fellow-subjects,  and  I  would 
rest  perfectly  satisfied. 

I  fear  I  have  trespassed  too  long  on  the  patience  of  the 
meeting — but  there  were  one  or  two  points  more  on  which  I 
would  say  a  word.  The  bill  which  the  Lords  had  rejected  was 
accompanied  part  of  the  way  in  the  other  House,  with  two 
measures  caUed  its  wings.  Those  measures  were  condemned 
by  some  who  were  friendly  to  the  great  question  ;  but  the 
Catholics  of  Ireland  were  not  the  authors  of  those  measures  ; 
they  were  no  party  to  their  origin.  Of  that  bill  which  went 
to  make  a  provision  for  the  Catholic  clergy  I  would  say,  that 
the  clergy  desired  no  such  provision.  They  are  content  to 
serve  their  flocks  for  the  humble  pittance  which  they  now 
receive.  The  rewards  to  which  they  looked  for  their  incessant 
and  valuable    labors,  are — let  every  hair  of  the   Bishop  of 


ON  THE  DEFEAT  OF  THE  EMANCIPATION  BILL.  139 

Chester's  wig  stand  on  end  at  hearing  it — not  of  this  but  of  ano- 
ther world.  It  is  not  the  Cathohcs  who  desu-e  those  measures. 
They  are  sought  for  by  the  Protestants,  who  look  upon  them 
as  some  sort  of  security ;  and  the  Cathohcs  are  disposed  to 
make  some  sacrifice  to  honest  prejudices,  by  acceding  to  that 
which  they  did  not  approve.  It  was  this  f  eehng  which  pro- 
duced those  measures,  and  brought  on  that  ridiculous  scene 
of  one  of  his  Majesty's  ministers  strongly  objecting  to  the 
*'  wings,"  wdiile  another  was  eagerly  flapping  them  on,  until, 
hke  the  tomb  of  Mahomet,  the  CathoUc  bill  hung  suspended 
between  the  two  counteracting  influences.  As  to  the  second 
bill,  respecting  the  forty  shilling  freeholders,  it  is  one  which  I 
cannot  approve.  I  am  too  much  of  a  reformer,  and  of  that 
class  called  "  radical,"  to  wish  for  any  such  alteration.  I  did 
assent  to  it  only  because  it  was  considered  that  Protestants 
desu'ed  it.  I  would  much  rather  have  emancipation  without 
it.  They  are  now,  however,  gone  by,  and  I  hope  they  will 
never  again  make  their  appearance — certain  it  is,  I  shall  never 
wish  for  them,  unless  they  are  earnestly  desired  by  the  Pro- 
testants. 

I  now,  my  lord  Duke,  take  my  leave ;  I  fear  I  have  ex- 
hausted the  patience  of  this  meeting.  I  am  grateful  for  the 
attention  with  which  I  have  been  heard ;  I  have  spoken  under 
feelings,  perhaps,  of  some  irritation — certainly  under  those  of 
deep  disappointment.  A  crowd  of  thoughts  have  rushed  upon 
me,  and  I  have  given  utterance  to  them  as  they  arose,  without 
allowing  my  judgment  a  pause  as  to  which  I  should  select  and 
which  restrain.  I  now  go  back  to  my  own  country,  where  I 
expect  to  find  a  feverish  restlessness  at  having  insult  added  to 
our  injuries.  Our  enemies — perhaps  I  ought  to  say  ojDpo- 
nents — have  offered  this  insult ;  they  have  barbed  with  dis- 
grace, the  dart  of  death.  It  will  be  impossible  not  to  expect 
a  degree  of  soreness  at  the  way  in  which  our  claims  have  been 
met — at  this  additional  insult.  It  is  impossible  not  to  feel 
disappointed  at  the  manner  in  which  we  have  seen  Lord  Liver- 
pool truckle  to  the  nonsense  about  the  coronation  oath  (some 
person  here  said  No,  no.)  I  repeat  it,  he  did  ;  and  my  con- 
viction is  that  all  we  heard  reported  of  him  in  the  newspapers 
was  dictated  from  that  quarter.     "We  shall  now  return  to  Ire- 


14:0  SELECT  SPEECHES   OF    DANIEL  o'CONNELL. 

land,  and  there  advise  our  countrymen  to  be  patient — to  bear 
tlie  further  delay  of  justice  with  calmness,  but  not  to  relax 
their  fair,  open,  and  legitimate  efforts  in  again  seeking  for 
their  rights.  They  have  put  down  one  association  ;  I  promise 
to  treat  them  to  another.  They  shall  trench  further  on  your 
hberties — they  shall  dive  deeper  into  the  vitals  of  the  consti- 
tution before  they  drive  us  from  our  pui-pose.  We  shall  go  on, 
but  it  will  be  without  anger  or  turbulence.  In  that  steady 
course  we  will  continue  to  use  all  legitimate  means  to  accom- 
plish our  object,  until  Enghsh  good  sense  shall  overcome 
bigotry  in  high  stations — shall  put  down  intolerance  in  per- 
sons great  in  office — until  the  minister  be  driven  back  to  the 
half  honesty  which  he  before  possessed,  or  to  that  retirement 
which  he  rigidly  deserves." 


SPEECH  ON  THE  TREATY  OF  LIMEEICK,  1826. 


[On  submitting  to  the  Catholic  Association,  in  1826,  the  draft  of 
a  petition  to  parliament,  asking  that  the  provisions  of  the  treaty 
of  Limerick  be  carried  into  effect,  Mr.  O'Connell  s^Doke  as  fol- 
lows :] 

The  question  is  narrowed  to  a  single  point,  and  to  any  one 
reviewing  the  facts  which  history  presented,  it  was  impossible 
to  deny  that  the  treaty  has  been  foully  and  flagitiously  vio- 
lated. The  penal  code  was  a  violation  of  it,  and  while  a  par- 
ticle of  that  code  remains,  so  long  the  solemn  compact  entered 
into  between  the  English  government  and  the  Irish  people  is 
a  disgraceful  monument  of  British  perfidy.  That  treaty  was 
a  solemn,  deliberate  and  authorized  agreement.  It  was  signed 
by  bishops  and  commanders,  and  it  was  signed  by  Ginkle, 
who  had  the  command  of  his  government  to  give  even  better 
terms  than  it  insured,  and  to  make  peace  on  any  conditions, 
no  matter  how  favorable  to  the  people  of  Limerick,  and  of 
course  to  the  whole  people  of  Ireland.  Who  is  it,  who  looks 
at  history,  that  can  be  surprised  that  the  wish  to  effect  a 
peace  should  exist  on  the  part  of  the  EngHsh  ?  At  the  time  of 


SPEECH   ON   THE  TREATY  OF  LIMERICK.  141 

the  war  England  was  split  into  parties  and  dissensions.  Wil- 
liam had  the  adherence  of  the  Whigs  to  his  cause,  but  the 
Tories,  who  were  the  more  numerous,  thougli  not  so  powerful, 
were  arrayed  against  him.  The  Tories  were  like  the  cowardly 
Orange  faction  of  the  present  day ;  they  were  mean  and  das- 
tardly, and  took  especial  care  to  keep  themselves  from  every 
enterprise  in  which  their  persons  would  be  endangered.  The 
Scotcli  highlanders,  a  brave,  hardy,  and  chivalrous  race,  who 
were  Catholics,  were  devoted  to  the  house  of  Stuart,  and  so 
were  those  of  the  lowlands  too.  The  Calvinists  of  that  coun- 
try were  in  the  same  situation  with  the  Irish  of  the  present 
day ;  their  consciences  were  oppressed — their  religious  liberty 
was  restricted.  They  fought  however  in  the  field  for  their 
religion.  Their  eflbrts,  although  courageous  and  adventurous, 
were  not  suited  to  the  meek  spii-it  of  Christianity.  I  would 
not  fight  for  religion,  because  religion  does  not  inculcate  nor 
sanction  such  an  act ;  but  for  my  civil  rights,  I  trust  in  God, 
there  is  no  man  who  has  a  more  sincere  regard  for  their  value, 
or  who  would  make  greater  sacrifices  and  efforts  for  their 
defence.  In  England  there  were  many  enemies  against  Wil- 
liam, and  his  situation  was  precarious.  In  Ireland  his  pros- 
pects were  bad  and  discouraging  :  the  Irish  forces,  though  in 
part  unsuccessful,  were  not  discomfited,  and  tliey  were  learn- 
ing those  rules  of  discipline,  without  which  an  army  is  no 
more  than  a  mob.  The  battle  of  the  Boyne  was  lost  not  by 
the  inferiority  of  the  Irish  forces,  but  by  the  paltry,  pitiful 
cowardice  of  James.  He  only  appeared  once  in  the  battle  on 
that  day.  He  made  only  one  appeal,  and  that  was  when  the 
soldiery  of  England  was  cutting  down  by  the  troops  of  Ire- 
land under  Hamilton — then  he  exclaimed,  "  0  spare  my  Eng- 
lish subjects !"  Like  another  Duke  of  York  he  took  up  his 
position  in  the  rear,  and  the  races  of  the  Helder  had  a  glori- 
ous prototype  in  the  races  of  the  Boyne.  "  Change  generals," 
exclaimed  the  gallant  Began,  in  the  evening  when  the  battle 
was  done,  "  Change  generals,  and  we  wiU  fight  the  battle  over 
again!"  Three  thousand  were  wounded  in  that  battle  and 
but  three  hundred  were  taken  prisoners !  How  illustrative  of 
the  humanity  of  the  conquerors !  Still  Clare  was  open,  and 
its  batteries  were  in  possession  of  the  Irish.    The  fortifications 


142  SELECT  SPEECHES   OF  DANIEL    O'CONNELL, 

of  Limerick  were  jet  at  their  command — Frencli  succors  wore 
daily  expected — the  war  between  England  and  France  was 
already  declared — and  with  such  opposition,  were  it  not  for 
the  treaty  of  Limerick,  WUham  would  have  been  driven  back 
into  Holland,  if  even  there  he  would  have  found  a  refuge 
from  the  French.  The  winter  was  fast  approaching.  His 
armies  consisted  of  some  Dutch  and  some  Brandenburg  troops, 
and  some  that  were  called  Irish  on  whom  no  reliance  was 
placed  :  they  were  the  EnniskiUen  and  Londonderry  regiments. 
Oh  !  what  regiments  these  were !  Schomberg,  in  speaking  of 
them,  was  only  puzzled  to  decide  which  of  the  two  regiments 
was  more  thievish,  because  both  the  regiments  were  much 
less  remarkable  for  their  valor  than  for  their  propensity  to  rob 
and  steal.  Their  officers  were  peasants — plebeians  who  had 
advanced  themselves  by  their  baseness,  and  like  the  Orange- 
men of  the  present  time,  they  were  formidable  only  to  an  un- 
armed people.  It  was  not  unhkely  that  Mr.  Dawson  was  the 
descendant  of  one  of  these  peasants.  The  pleasure  he  felt  in 
reverting  to  those  times  might  probably  be  thus  accounted  for. 
This  Mr.  Dawson,  who,  if  he  were  not  a  clerk  in  office,  would 
not  be  worthy  of  contradiction,  asserts  many  extraordinary 
things  respecting  this  country.  He  felt  no  interest  in  preserv- 
ing its  character,  because,  hke  his  brother  Orangemen,  he  was 
not  indigenous  to  the  soil.  They  must  certainly  be  exotics, 
for  if  half  their  venom  was  natural,  the  influence  of  St.  Pat- 
rick would  be  effectual  in  banishing  the  reptiles  from  among 
us.     But  the  reptile  stiU  lives,  and  here  are  its  hisses. 

[Mr.  O'Connell  here  took  up  a  printed  repcjrt  of  Mr.  Dawson's 
speech.]  ' 

Mr.  Dawson  tells  us  that  the  history  of  Ireland  is  a  mere 
waste — not  a  spot  in  it  to  vary  the  dismal  scene  but  London- 
derry, that  furnished  the  robbers  to  Marshal  Schomberg. 
"Let  us  trace,"  says  he,  "its  dark  and  bloody  progress. 
When  a  foreign  foe  invaded,  it  shrunk  at  the  foot  of  an  insig- 
nificant conqueror."  And  this  is  what  Mr.  Dawson  said  of  a 
country  to  which  he  boasts  of  belonging.  Let  me  tell  him 
this  country  was  never  beat.  It  was  by  Irishmen  she  was 
always  ruined.     Their  treachery  and  disunion  were  the  cause 


SPEECH   ON  THE  TREATY   OF  LIMERICK.  143 

of  her  defeat.  Four  fifths  of  tlie  Irish  troops  joined  the 
CromwelHan  invaders  under  Dermot,  and  it  was  to  their  deser- 
tion, and  not  to  the  superior  arms  of  her  enemies,  that  her 
conquest  was  attributable.  Mr.  Dawson  proceeded — "  con- 
tinued insurrection,  intestine  wars,  bloody  massacres,  treache- 
rous treaties."  Treacherous  treaties!  Come  forward,  Mr. 
Dawson,  with  your  native  host  of  Orangemen,  and  prove 
infraction  of  one  single  treaty  on  the  part  of  the  Irish.  I  ask 
but  one.  But  he  takes  care  to  make  the  charge  general.  Oh ! 
that  is  the  way  in  which  Hbels  and  mahgnant  imputations  are 
uttered  and  circulated ;  for  he  knows  he  cannot  substantiate 
it.  "  Versatur  in  generalibus."  Oh !  how  fatally  true  the 
Irish  were  to  their  treaties  may  be  read  in  that  of  Limerick. 
The  treaty  was  signed  before  communication  was  had  to  the 
other  part  of  the  army,  which  were,  Mr.  Chairman,  under  the 
command  of  an  ancestor  of  your  own.  Before  it  was  com- 
pleted, the  French  fleet  with  men  and  arms  arrived  at  Dingle. 
Some  argued  that  the  treaty  was  not  binding — that  it  had 
been  agreed  uj)on  only  in  the  South.  "What  was  the  reply  ? 
"  We  know  we  are  not  bound  by  the  treaty,  but  Irish  honor  is 
pledged,  and  never  shall  we  stain  it."  And  well  did  they  observe 
it.  They  dismissed  the  French  troops — they  admitted  their 
enemies.  They  relied  on  Enghsh  faith  and  Orange  honor,  and 
the  consequence,  the  natural  consequence,  was  that  they  were 
duped.  But  I  turn  on  Mr.  Dawson  and  say  to  him — you  accuse 
us  of  violating  treaties ;  if  you  cannot  show  me  one  you  are  a 
slanderer.  And  I  turn  on  him  again  and  say — show  me  one 
sohtary  treaty  that  England  has  ever  performed  toward  us,  and 
I  will  forgive  her  aill  the  rest.  No,  sir,  from  the  time  the  first 
footstep  of  the  Saxon  polluted  our  land,  down  to  the  last,  and 
not  least  flagrant  breach  of  faith  at  the  execrable  Union,  I  defy 
him  to  show  me  one  compact  between  England  and  this  coun- 
try, that  has  not  been  treacherously  and  basely  broken.  The 
description  of  a  treaty  with  the  Irish,  given  by  Clarendon,  shows 
that  the  intention,  at  the  moment  of  entering  into  them,  was  to 
delude  and  betray  us.  Next,  Mr.  Dawson  says  :  "  A  system- 
atic combination  against  the  introduction  of  the  arts  and  bless- 
ings of  peace  are  (with  those  qualities  he  before  stated)  to  be 
found  in  mournful  succession  throughout  the  lapse  of  centu- 


144  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

ries."  Eeally,  this  is  \erj,  xerj  heartrending.  They  first 
take  away  our  possessions,  our  rights,  our  wealth,  and  every 
incentive  to  labor  and  industry,  and  then  one  of  that  very 
faithless  and  base  crew  who  betrayed  us,  an  underlmg  of  a 
minister,  is  sent  to  thwart  and  irritate  us — to  charge  us  with 
the  effects  of  their  own  perfidy,  and  to  remind  us  of  the  bless- 
ings we  have  lost  by  being  the  victims  of  their  diabolical 
deceit. 

"  During  five  or  six  centuries,"  says  Mr.  Dawson,  "  the  his- 
tory of  Ireland  presents  not  one  single  fact  to  claim  the  admi- 
ration or  even  the  respect  of  posterity."  The  blundering  bigot 
then,  with  a  classic  afi'ectation,  asks  :  "  Where  can  we  look  for 
one  green  spot  to  cheer  us  in  our  gloomy  pilgrimage  ?"  Oh, 
hear  this  Orange  bigot  asking  for  a  green  spot !  I  was 
reading  at  the  very  time  I  received  the  newspaper  with  Mr. 
Dawson's  speech,  a  passage  in  a  work  which  has  been  ever 
and  is  still  looked  up  to  as  a  high  authority  on  the  subject  of 
which  it  treats.  It  is  an  account  of  the  injuries  and  massa- 
cres of  the  Irish  in  1641,  by  Dr.  Curry,  and  there  the  occur- 
rence to  which  I  allude  is  to  be  found.  Many,  innumerable 
instances  could  be  drawn  from  the  historians  of  the  times  in 
which  Mr.  Dawson's  ignorance  delights  to  revel,  not  of  one 
fact,  but  of  hundreds  of  facts,  calculated  to  elevate  the  charac- 
ter of  the  CathoHcs  of  Ireland.  Speaking  of  the  county  of 
Mayo,  the  historian  says  :  "  In  this  county  few  murders  were 
committed  by  either  side,  though  the  libel  saith,  that  about 
two  hundred  and  fifty  Protestants  were  murdered,  whereof  at 
Belluke  two  hundred  and  twenty ;  whereas  not  one  person  was 
murdered  there,  which  the  now  Lady  of  Montrath  can  witness  ; 
her  ladyship  and  Sir  Eobert  Hanna,  her  father,  with  many 
others,  being  retreated  thither  for  security,  were  all  conveyed 
safe  to  Manor  Hamilton.  And  it  is  observable  that  the  said 
lady  and  the  rest  came  to  Mr.  Owen  O'Eorcke's,  who  kept  a 
garrison  at  Drumaheir,  for  the  Irish,  before  they  came  to 
Manor  Hamilton,  whose  brother  was  prisoner  with  Sir  Frede- 
rick Hamilton.  And  the  said  Mr.  O'Korcke,  having  so  many 
persons  of  quality  in  his  hands,  sent  to  Sir  Frederick  to  enlarge 
his  brother,  and  that  he  would  convey  them  all  safe  to  him. 
But  Sir  Frederick,  instead  of  enlarging  his  brother,  hanged 


SPEECH  ON  THE  TREATY  OP  LIMERICK.  145 

him  the  next  day,  which  might  have  well  provoked  the  gentle- 
man to  revenge,  if  he  had  not  more  humanity  than  could  be 
well  expected  upon  such  occasions,  and  in  times  of  so  great 
confusion ;  yet  he  sent  them  all  safe  when  they  desired."  Yes, 
he  sent  them  aU  safe  when  they  desired.  He  did  what  he 
ought  to  do,  harrowed  as  his  heart  must  have  been  at  the 
atrocious  outrage  that  had  been  committed  by  his  rash  and 
ferocious  enemy.  He  did  what  an  Irish  gentleman  did  do, 
and  does  do — he  spurned  at  cruelty.  He  was  not  goaded,  even 
by  the  example  set  him,  into  an  imitation  of  barbarity.  His 
honor  stifled  his  sense  of  injury.  I  will  give  that  fact  to  Mr. 
Dawson,  and  let  liim  make  the  most  of  it,  in  classic  fulmina- 
tions  against  the  Catholics  of  Ireland.  Let  Mr.  Dawson  read 
this  fact,  and  if  he  persist  in  aspersing  his  native  land  after 
the  perusal  of  it — if  he  should  then  impugn  the  chivalrous  gen- 
erosity— the  humanity — the  virtues  of  Ireland,  I  will  only  say, 
that  if  Ireland  has  produced  generous  hearts  and  dispositions, 
she  has  also  produced  monsters  and  anomahes,  which  have 
turned  what  was  intended  to  be  one  of  the  gardens  of  the 
world  into  the  pitiful  pelting  province  that  she  is  at  this 
moment ! 

Mr.  Dawson  had  said  that  the  object  of  James  II.  was  to 
estabhsh  the  Cathohc  religion  both  in  England  and  Ireland, 
and  with  it  unUmited  despotism.  This  was  a  false  assertion  ; 
he  did  no  more  than  to  proclaim  toleration,  and  this  was 
enough  for  the  Dawsons  of  the  day  to  expel  him  from  the 
throne.  The  prosecution  of  the  seven  bishops  I  now  condemn, 
and  if  I  had  Hved  in  the  day  of  the  occurrence  I  would  have 
condemned  it  then.  Mr.  Dawson  says,  that  in  order  to  effect 
the  purpose  of  estabhshing  an  unlimited  despotism  in  Ireland, 
James  proceeded  to  remodel  the  civil  estabhshments,  and  he 
accordingly  displaced  every  Protestant  who  held  an  office  in 
the  administration  of  justice,  and  filled  up  the  place  of  chan- 
cellor, chief  judges,  puisne  judges,  privy  counsellors,  sheriffs, 
magistrates,  and  even  constables,  with  CathoHcs.  Talking  of 
constables  reminds  me  of  the  Dublin  corporation ;  that  im- 
maculate body  once  petitioned  for  the  removal  of  Mulvaney, 
the  scavenger,  from  his  functions,  because  he  was,  contrary  to 
law,  a  Papist !    Oh,  what  a  relentless  spirit !     They  would  not 


146  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL   O'CONNELL. 

allow  a  Papist  to  fill  even  the  dirtiest  ofl&ce  of  the  state.  It 
is  asserted  by  Mr.  Dawson,  that  all  the  judges  appointed  by- 
James  were  intolerant.  This  is  false  ;  James  nominated  only 
three  judges — Nugent,  Lord  Ptiverston,  Sir  Stephen  Eice,  and 
Daly.  Would  to  God  all  Judge  Dalys  were  hke  him.  He 
never  raised  himself  to  the  bench  by  destroying  the  interests 
of  his  country.  He  never  devoted  his  leisure  hours  to  calum- 
niating his  wretched,  ragged  countrymen  !  All  three  individ- 
uals nominated  by  James  to  the  bench,  were  remarkable 
for  their  purity  and  perfection.  They  are  quoted  by  Protest- 
ant writers  as  the  models  of  judicial  knowledge  and  purity. 
It  was  related  of  Rice  that  he  gambled  his  property,  and  this 
was  the  only  blemish  that  ever  suUied  his  reputation.  They 
lived  in  troubled  times  and  they  survived  them.  They  did  not 
fly,  as  they  would  have  done  if  they  had  been  guilty  of  a  crime 
or  a  dereliction  of  duty.  They  lived  honored  and  respected, 
and  they  descended  to  their  graves  without  taint  or  reproach, 
having  served  their  King  well,  and  I  trust  having  served  their 
God  better.  Oh !  it  is  only  Orange  bigotry  that  could  ransack 
the  very  graves  to  find  materials  of  insult ;  but  in  this  instance, 
as  in  every  other,  it  has  failed,  and  I  defy  it  to  the  proof. 
Mr.  Dawson  had  alleged  it  as  a  charge,  that  it  was  enacted  by 
James  that  three  fellows  of  the  University  were  prohibited 
from  meeting  together.  Even  if  it  were  so,  how  did  the  enact- 
ment differ  from  the  enactments  usual  in  all  cases  of  civil 
commotion.  What  was  this  act  intended  to  prevent  but  a 
Protestant  insurrection  ?  Flagrante  bello,  it  is  provided  that 
there  shall  be  no  meetings  of  persons  who  might  conspire  to 
cause  a  pubhc  tumult,  and  this  which  is  now  practiced — nay, 
which  is  carried  to  an  unparalleled  extent  in  Ireland  under 
the  present  government,  is  charged  as  a  crime  upon  James. 
But  it  should  not  be  forgotten  that  by  the  repeal  of  that  act 
of  settlement,  the  monarch  himself  was  a  sufferer  to  an  im- 
mense amount.  The  passing  of  that  act,  however,  might  not 
be  justified,  but  decidedly  any  act  that  would  tend  to  subvert 
it  would  be  unjust.  Transfers  and  conveyances  had  been 
made  to  such  an  extent,  that  it  would  be  an  unjustifiable  crime 
to  disturb  them.  I  have  been  accused  of  recommending  the 
repeal  of  the  act  of  settlement,  and  I  dare  say  I  will  now  be 


SPEECH   ON  THE  TREATY  OF  LIMEEICK.  147 

accused  of  recommending  it.  But  as  a  proof  of  my  sincerity 
in  defending  it,  I  will  say  tliat  if  that  act  were  annulled  I 
would  be  comparatively  a  beggar.  My  property  hangs  upon 
its  continuance.  The  property  of  my  two  brothers,  who  are 
both  independent,  hangs  upon  the  same  title.  What  then 
have  I  to  gain  by  a  change  ?  Mr.  Dawson  had  complained 
of  the  attainder  of  two  thousand  six  hundred  Protestants  by 
James.  But  what  was  there  in  that,  worthy  of  reprobation  ? 
Those  attainted  men  had  fled  the  country ;  they  were  told  that 
if  they  did  not  come  back  within  a  certain  period  they  would  be 
attainted.  They  did  not  return  and  they  were  attainted !  Why 
should  they  not?  They  were  attainted  because  they  were 
enemies  of  the  King  ;  and  if  they  were  not  enemies  of  the 
King,  they  were  base  cowards,  for  they  ran  away  when  their 
country  needed  their  assistance  in  its  cause.  In  Athens  it  was 
the  law  that  every  man  who  was  neutral  was  criminal — "He 
who  is  not  for  us  is  against  us."  And  shall  it  be  said  that  those 
who  fled  from  their  country  when  she  needed  their  energies  on 
her  behalf,  were  not  deserving  of  obloquy  and  punishment  ? 

!Mr.  Dawson  had  said  that  the  parUament  of  James  was 
Cathohc.  I  admit  the  fact.  But  let  Mr.  Dawson  show  me 
any  act  of  their  doing  that  can  shake  their  purity  and  hon- 
esty !  Let  him  show  me  an  act  even  proposed  for  the  piirpose 
of  oppressing  the  consciences  of  Protestants  !  No,  the  parha- 
ment  of  that  day  sat  in  friendship  with  a  few  Protestants,  and 
their  BiU  of  Bights  was  more  extensive  even  than  that  of  Eng- 
land. Even  after  the  excesses  and  cruelties  that  had  been  com- 
mitted against  the  Catholics,  when  they  were  deprived  of 
power,  and  when  they  regained  it,  was  there  a  system  of  blood 
and  cruelty  or  their  part,  although  they  had  the  dominion  if 
they  used  it  ?  Under  Mary  the  Cathohcs  of  Ireland  were  not 
persecutors,  and  again  under  James  they  wielded  thek  power 
in  mercy  and  toleration.  They  forgot  the  persecutions  which 
their  body  endured  under  Elizabeth,  and  they  only  bore  in 
recollection  the  character  of  their  rehgion,  which  taught  them 
to  give  charity  and  good-will  for  persecution  and  cruelty.  Mr. 
Dawson  had  said  that  King  James  had  taken  away  their 
chm'ches  from  the  Protestants.  This  assertion,  as  well  as  the 
other  assertion,  made  by  that  profound  statesman,  was  false. 


14:8  SELECT  SPEECHES   OF  DANIEL    O'CONNELL. 

This  statement  was  derived  from  the  pure  pages  of  Archbishop 
King's  work.  The  cathedral  of  Christ's  Church  in  Dublin  was 
the  King's  chapel,  and  it  was  in  that  case  alone  that  James 
exercised  his  authority,  and  in  dispossessing  the  holders  of 
that  cathedral  he  acted  under  his  royal  right  and  was  not  in- 
fluenced by  his  rehgious  feelings.  The  contrary  was  the  fact 
with  regard  to  Wexford.  In  that  county  the  Cathohc  soldiery 
had  taken  possession  of  a  Protestant  church,  and  when  James 
heard  the  circumstances  he  ejected  the  soldiery  and  restored 
the  church  to  its  owners.  Doctor  Leslie,  a  learned  divine  of 
the  Protestant  Church,  had  challenged  the  accuracy  of  King's 
book,  and  had  denounced  and  refuted  it,  and  now,  after  such 
a  lapse  of  years,  Mr.  Peel  sends  out  his  underling,  Mr.  Daw- 
son, his  clerk,  to  repeat  the  calumnies.  "Who  was  this  King  ? 
He  was  a  vile  parasite  of  James  ?  He  was  the  ecclesiastic 
who  prayed  from  his  pulpit,  that  God  might  blast  him  if  he 
ever  preached  any  other  doctrine  than  passive  obedience,  and 
at  another  time,  that  God  might  blast  and  destroy  William 
and  his  consort,  if  they  had  any  intention  of  invading  this 
country  !  He — he  is  the  vUe  toad-eater,  who  has  denounced 
the  monarch  whose  feet  he  kissed !  Dopping,  who  preached 
up  that  there  was  no  faith  to  be  kept  with  the  Catholics  of 
Limerick,  was  the  first  to  present  an  address  to  King  James 
on  his  landing.  What  an  exquisite  pair  of  defenders  of  the 
violation  of  the  treaty  of  Limerick !  What  immaculate  au- 
thority for  Mr.  Dawson  to  quote  from !  Is  it  to  be  endured 
that  Peel,  who  knows  nothing  of  the  history  of  these  times,  or 
the  history  of  our  country,  is  to  send  out  one  of  his  clerks  to 
blow  up,  with  his  pestiferous  breath,  the  embers  of  those  un- 
holy fires  of  bigotry  which  had  been  nearly  extinguished  by 
the  superincumbent  influence  of  Hberahty  and  good  fellow- 
ship, and  to  excite,  by  his  evil  agency,  the  inflammable  ma- 
terials of  Irish  society  ?  Before  I  conclude,  I  will  read  an 
extract  from  a  work  written  by  Mr.  Storey,  a  chaplain  in  the 
army  of  Kiug  Wilham,  who  is  a  tolerably  good  authority  on 
the  bravery  of  the  Irish  troops,  which  Mr.  Dawson  has  re- 
pudiated : 

Wednesday,  the  24th.     A  breach  being  made  near  St.  John's  Gate, 
over  the  Black  Battery,  that  was  about  twelve  yards  long,  and  pretty  flat, 


I 


SPEECH  ON  THE  TEEATY   OF  LIMERICK.  149 

as  it  appeared  to  its,  the  King  gave  orders  that  the  counterscarp  should 
be  attacked  that  afternoon,  to  which  purpose  a  great  many  woolsacks 
were  carried  down,  and  good  store  of  ammunition,  with  other  things 
suitable  for  such  work.  AU  the  gi-enadiers  in  the  army  were  ordered  to 
march  down  into  the  trenches,  which  they  did.  Those,  being  about 
five  hundred,  were  commanded,  each  company,  by  their  respective  cap- 
tains, and  were  to  make  the  first  attack,  being  supj)orted  by  one  bat- 
talion of  the  Blue  Dutch  on  the  right,  then  Lieutenant  Douglass's  regi- 
ment, Brigadier  Stuart's,  my  Lord  Meath's,  and  my  Lord  Lisburn's,  as 
also  a  Brandenburg  regiment.  These  were  all  posted  towards  the  breach, 
upon  the  left  of  whom  were  Col.  Cutts  and  the  Danes.  Lieutenant 
General  Douglass  commanded,  and  their  orders  were  to  possess  them- 
selves of  the  counterscarp  and  maiatain  it.  We  had  also  a  body  of  horse 
drawn  up  to  succor  the  foot  upon  occasion.  About  half  an  hour  after 
three,  the  signal  being  given  by  firing  three  pieces  of  cannon,  the  grena- 
diers, being  in  the  furthest  angle  of  our  trenches,  leaped  over  and  ran 
towai'ds  the  counterscarp,  firing  their  pieces  and  throwing  their  grenades. 
This  gave  the  alarm  to  the  Lrish,  who  had  their  guns  all  ready,  and 
discharged  great  and  small  shot  upon  us  as  fast  as  'twas  possible.  Our 
men  were  not  behind  them  in  either,  so  that  in  less  than  two  minutes, 
the  noise  was  so  terrible  that  one  would  have  thought  the  very  skies 
were  ready  to  rend  in  sunder.  This  was  seconded  by  dust,  smoke,  and 
all  the  terrors  that  the  art  of  man  could  invent  to  ruin  and  undo  one 
another ;  and  to  make  it  the  more  uneasy,  the  day  itself  was  exces- 
sively hot  to  the  bystanders,  and  much  more  sore,  in  all  respects,  to 
those  upon  action.  Captain  Carlisle,  of  my  Lord  Drogheda's  regiment, 
ran  in  with  his  grenadiers  to  the  counterscarp,  and  though  he  received 
two  wounds  between  that  and  the  trenches,  yet  he  went  forward  and 
commanded  his  men  to  throw  in  the  grenades,  but  in  the  leaping  into 
the  dry  ditch  below  the  counterscarp,  an  Irishman  below  shot  him  dead. 
Lieutenant  Burton,  however,  encouraged  the  men,  and  they  got  upon 
the  counterscarp,  and  aU  the  rest  of  the  grenadiers  were  as  ready  as 
they.  By  this  time  the  Irishmen  were  throwing  down  their  arms  and 
running  as  fast  as  they  could  into  town,  which,  our  men  perceiving, 
entered  the  breach,  pell-mell,  with  them,  and  half  the  Earl  of  Drogheda's 
grenadiers  and  some  others  were  actually  in  town.  The  regiments  that 
were  to  second  the  grenadiers  went  to  the  counterscarp,  and,  having  no 
order  to  proceed,  they  stopt."  [I  engage  they  did,  they  stopt  sure 
enough.]  "  The  Irishmen  were  all  running  from  the  walls,  and  quite  over 
the  bridge  into  the  English  town ;  but  seeing  but  a  few  of  our  men 
enter,  they  were  with  much  ado  persuaded  to  rally,  and  those  that  were 
in  seeing  themselves  not  followed,  and  their  ammunition  being  spent, 
they  designed  to  retreat,  but  some  were  shot,  some  taken,  and  the  rest 
came  out  again,  but  very  few  without  being  wounded.  The  Irish  thf n 
ventured  upon  the  breach  again,  and  from  the  walls  and  every  place  so 
pestered  us  upon  the  counterscarp,  that,  after  nigh  three  hours  resist- 


150  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

ing  bullets,  stones,  broken  bottles,  from  the  very  women,  wlio  boldly 
stood  in  the  breach  and  were  nearer  our  men  than  their  own, " 

And  here  I  will  pay  a  tribute  to  the  heroic  virtues  of  these 
women,  who  thus  sacrificed  themselves  for  their  country's 
honor.  An  officer  of  the  Irish  army  was  wounded.  The 
instance  is  one  of  singular  interest,  arising  from  female  courage 
and  presence  of  mind.  He  was  wounded,  and  was  flying  into 
his  own  house,  and  was  pursued  by  an  enemy.  He  had  gained 
his  door,  and  his  wife,  from  a  window  in  the  house,  was  a  wit- 
ness of  his  efforts  to  escape  from  his  relentless  pursuer.  The 
window-stone  was  loose,  and  it  was  a  ready  instrument  for  her 
purpose.  Her  husband  was  nearly  a  victim  to  the  revenge  of 
his  foe,  who  had  just  stepped  upon  the  threshold,  when  the  im- 
pulse of  the  mind  of  the  fond  and  courageous  woman  gave  a 
strength  and  energy  to  her  efforts, — she  hurled  the  stone  upon 
the  ruffian's  head,  and  he  bit  the  dust.  Oh,  what  splendid  de- 
votion to  country !  "Would  there  have  been  an  Irish  heart 
among  the  Irish,  if  they  did  not  beat  out  their  invaders,  stim- 
ulated as  they  were,  by  such  heartcheering  examples. 

[Mr.  O'Connell  resumed  the  reading.] 

"  whatever  ways  could  be  thought  on  to  destroy  us,  our  ammunition 

being  spent,  it  was  judged  safest  to  return  to  our  trenches.  When  the 
work  was  at  the  hottest,  the  Brandenburg  regiment,  who  behaved  them- 
selves veiy  well,  had  got  upon  the  Black  Battery,  when  the  enemy's 
powder  happened,  to  take  fire,  and  blew  up  a  great  many  of  them,  the 
men,  fagots,  and.  stones,  and  what  not,  flying  into  the  air  with  a  most 
terrible  noise.  Colonel  Cutts  was  commanded  by  the  Duke  of  Wurtem- 
burg,  to  march  towards  the  spur  at  the  south  gate,  and  beat  in  the  Irish 
that  appeared  there,  which  he  did,  though  he  lost  several  of  his  men, 
and  was  himself  wounded  ;  he  went  within  half  musket  shot  of  the  gate, 
and  all  his  men  were  open  to  the  enemy's  fire,  who  lay  secure  within  the 
walls.  The  Danes  were  not  idle  all  the  while,  but  fii-ed  upon  the  enemy 
with  all  imaginable  fury,  and  had  several  killed,  but  the  mischief  was, 
we  had  but  one  breach,  and  all  towards  the  left,  it  was  impossible  to  get 
into  the  town  when  the  gates  were  shut,  if  there  had  been  no  enemy  to 
oppose  us,  without  a  great  many  scaling  ladders,  which  we  had  not. 
From  half  an  hour  after  three  till  after  seven,  there  was  one  continued 
fire  of  grape  and  small  shot  without  any  intermission ;  insomuch  that 
the  smoke  that  went  from  the  town  reached  in  one  continued  cloud  to 
the  top  of  a  mountain  at  least  six  miles  off.  When  our  men  drew  ofi', 
some  were  brought  up  dead,  and  some  without  a  leg,  others  wanted 


SPEECH   ON  THE  TREATY   OF  LIMERICK.  151 

arms,  and  some  were  blind  with  powder,  especially  a  great  many  of  the 
poor  Brandenburghers  looked  hke  furies,  with  the  misfortune  of  gun- 
powder. One  Mr.  Upton,  getting  in  amongst  the  Irish  in  town,  and 
seeing  no  way  to  escape,  went  in  the  crowd  undiscovered,  till  he  came  at 
the  Governor,  and  then  surrendered  himself.  There  was  a  captain,  one 
Bedloe,  who  deserted  the  enemy  the  day  before,  and  now  went  upon  the 
breach,  and  fought  bravely  on  our  side,  for  which  his  Majesty  gave  him 
a  company.  The  King  stood  nigh  Cromwell's  fort  aU  the  time,  and  the 
business  being  over,  he  went  to  his  camp  very  much  concerned,  as  in- 
deed was  the  whole  army  ;  for  you  might  have  seen  a  mixture  of  anger 
and  sorrow  in  everybody's  countenance.  The  Irish  had  two  small  field 
pieces  planted  in  the  King's  Island,  which  flanked  their  own  counter- 
scarp, and  in  our  attack,  did  us  no  small  damage,  as  did  also  two  guns 
more  that  they  had  j)lanted  within  the  town,  opposite  the  breach,  and 
charged  with  cartridge  shot.  We  lost  at  least  five  hundred  upon  the 
spot,  and  had  a  thousand  more  wounded,  as  I  understood  by  the  sur- 
geons of  our  hospitals,  who  are  the  properest  judges.  The  Irish  lost  a 
great  many  by  cannon  and  other  ways  ;  but  it  cannot  be  supposed  that 
their  loss  should  be  equal  to  ours,  since  it  is  a  much  easier  thing  to  de- 
fend walls,  than  'tis  by  main  strength  to  force  people  from  them  ;  and 
one  man  within,  has  the  advantage  of  four  without." 

[Here  followed  a  Hst  of  officers  killed  and  wounded,  needless  to 
be  recounted.] 

Are  we  after  this  to  be  told  by  Dawson  that  our  country- 
men were  not  brave,  and  would  not  succeed,  if  tliey  had  held 
out?  In  a  base  violation  of  the  treaty,  which  had  been 
signed  before  the  walls  of  Limerick,  the  privileges  and  immu- 
nities promised,  were  denied, — the  treaty  was  broken — it 
stands  a  record  of  British  perfidy !  Our  ancestors,  sir,  for  I, 
too,  may  say  that  blood  runs  even  in  my  veins  from  those 
who  fought  before  Limerick,  are  denied  their  rights !  Your 
noble  brother,  degraded  from  his  natural  rank,  is  unrepresent- 
ed and  unrepresenting.  He  neither  has  a  vote  in  the  election 
of  his  own  order,  nor  the  voice  of  a  Forty-shilling  Free^ 
holder  in  returning  a  member  to  the  Commons'  House  of 
Parliament.  Where  is  the  hberty  the  CathoHcs  enjoyed  un- 
der Charles  L,  which  was  secured  to  them  by  the  treaty  of 
Limerick  ?  Tell  me  that,  Mr.  Dawson.  TeU  me  that.  Orange 
faction.  Let  Mr.  Peel  bring  his  borough  members,  who 
come  in  when  the  division  bell  is  rung,  to  assert  facts  contrary 
to  reason  and  religion  against  us ;  but  let  them  not  insult  us 


152  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'COKNELL. 

by  saying  that  tlie  treaty  of  Limerick  has  not  been  foully  vio- . 
lated. 

There  is  another  trait  of  Mr.  Dawson's  hypocrisy  that  is 
worth  mentioning.  After  my  examination  before  the  Parlia- 
mentary Committee,  Mr.  Dawson  came  up  to  me,  and  told  me, 
in  the  weakness  of  his  heart,  that  my  evidence  had  removed 
many  prejudices  from  him,  and  that  his  opinions  on  many 
subjects  were  altered.  I  rejoiced  at  the  declaration,  and  I 
respected  him  for  making  it  at  the  time.  I  mentioned  in  pub- 
he  the  fact,  and  stated  that  Mr.  Dawson  had  shaken  hands 
■with  me  in  the  interview,  and  this  part  of  the  relation  it  was 
deemed  necessary  to  contradict  in  the  Dubhn  Evening  Mail. 
I  do  not  know  Avhether  he  shook  hands  with  me  or  not.  I 
hope  now  he  did  not.  I  would  shrink  from  any  contact  with 
a  man  who  could  make  such  a  declaration  to  me  as  he  did, 
and  since  falsify  it  by  his  acts. 

I  have  done — I  have  shown  that  the  treaty  of  Liimerick 
was  fouUy  violated.  I  arraign  those  who  perpetuate  the  vio- 
lation by  their  hostility  to  us,  and  to  our  cause.  I  arraign 
their  bigotry  in  the  face  of  the  world ;  and  I  demand  in  the 
name  of  humanity  and  justice  and  faith,  that  at  least  the 
terms  of  the  compact  should  be  fulfilled. 


SPEECH  AT  THE  BAE  OF  THE  HOUSE  OF  COM^ 
MONS,  TO  MAINTAIN  HIS  RIGHT  TO  SIT  AS 
MEMBER  FOR  CLARE. 


I  CANNOT,  sir,  help  feeling  some  apprehension  when  I  state 
that  I  am  very  ignorant  of  the  forms  of  this  House,  and  there- 
fore that  I  shaU  require  much  indulgence  from  you,  if,  in  what 
I  am  about  to  say,  I  should  happen,  by  anything  that  may  fall 
from  me,  to  violate  them.  I  claim  my  right  to  sit  and  vote  in 
the  House,  as  the  representative  for  the  county  of  Clare, 
without  taking  the  Oath  of  Supremacy.  I  am  ready  to  take 
the  Oath  of  Allegiance,  provided  by  the  recent  statute,  which 


CONN  ELL  REFUSING  TO  TAKE  THE  OATH. 


CLAIMING  A  SEAT  IN  PARLIAMENT.  153 

was  passed  for  the  relief  of  his  Majesty's  Roman  Catholic  sub- 
jects. My  desire  is  to  have  that  oath  administered  to  me, 
and  of  course  I  must  be  prepared  to  show  that  I  am  quaUfi  d 
in  point  of  property ;  and  whether  the  House  thinks  I  can 
take  the  new  oath  or  not,  if  I  am  required  to  take  both,  I  am 
wiUing,  at  my  own  hazard,  to  sit  and  vote  in  the  House.  My 
right  is  in  its  own  nature  complete.  I  have  been  returned  as 
duly  elected  by  the  proper  officers.  It  appears  by  that  return, 
that  I  have  a  great  majority  of  the  county  of  Clare,  who  voted 
for  my  return.  That  return  has  since  been  discussed  in  a 
committee  of  this  House,  and  has  been  confirmed  by  the 
unanimous  decision  of  that  committee.  I  have  as  much  right 
to  sit  and  vote  in  this  House,  according  to  the  principles  of 
the  constitution,  as  any  of  the  honorable  or  right  honorable 
gentlemen  by  whom  I  am  surrounded.  I  am  a  representative 
of  the  people,  and  on  their  election  I  claim  the  right  of  exer- 
cising power  with  which  their  election  has  invested  me.  That 
question  cannot  arise  at  common  law ;  it  must  depend  only  on 
the  statute,  whether  a  representative  of  the  people  is  bound, 
before  he  discharges  his  duty  to  his  constituents,  to  take  an 
oath  of  any  description.  Up  to  the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  I  be- 
lieve I  am  correct  in  saying  that  no  such  oath  existed.  Up  to 
the  close  of  the  reign  of  Charles  II.,  no  oath  was  taken  within 
the  House  ;  the  30th  Charles  II.  was  the  first  statute  requir- 
ing any  oath  to  be  taken  within  the  House  itself.  The  Oath 
of  Allegiance  (and  no  man  is  more  ready  to  take  the  Oath  of 
Allegiance  than  I  am),  the  Oath  of  Supremacy  (and  there 
were  very  few  in  Parliament  at  that  time  who  would  not  take 
it),  and  the  Declaration,  were  for  the  first  time  introduced  by 
that  statute  ;  and  it  not  only  required  them  to  be  taken  and 
subscribed,  but  it  went  on  to  provide  remedies  against  individ- 
uals who  should  neglect  or  refuse  to  take  and  subscribe-  them. 
Among  those  remedies,  some  of  which  were  of  an  exceedingly 
extensive,  and  I  may  almost  caU  them  of  an  unlawful  nature, 
was  a  pecuniary  penalty  of  five  hundred  pounds  ;  which  I 
mention  because  I  shall  again  caU  the  attention  of  the  House 
to  it,  before  I  close  what  I  have  to  offer  to  its  consideration. 
The  purpose  of  that  statute  was  obvious  ;  it  was  stated  to  be 
"  for  the  mode  of  serving  the  King's  person  and  government," 


154  SELECT  SPEECHES   OF   DANIEL    O'CONNELL. 

and  the  mode  of  attaining  tliat  object  was  disabling  Papists 
from  sitting  in  either  House  of  Parliament.  I  am,  in  the  dis- 
courteous language  of  the  act,  a  Papist — I  come  within 
then*  description.  I  cannot  take  the  oath  prescribed,  and 
shall  shrink  from  signing  the  Declaration.  The  object  of  the 
statute  is  sufficiently  clear  from  its  title,  and  the  construction 
of  the  statute  must  follow  from  that  title.  Therefore  it  is  per- 
fectly evident  that  as  long  as  this  act  remained  in  force,  it 
would  have  been  vain  for  the  people  to  elect  me  for  any 
county  or  borough,  as  I  could  not  exercise  the  right  vested  in 
me.  The  law  declares  expressly,  that  a  refusal  to  take  the 
oath  shall  be  followed  by  the  vacating  of  the  seat,  and  the 
issue  of  a  new  writ. 

Up  to  the  period  of  the  Legislative  Union  with  Ireland,  this 
statute,  by  means  of  other  acts,  was  enforced,  that  is,  it  was 
partially  enforced ;  the  Declaration  was  enforced,  and  I  find, 
by  reference  to  the  statute,  which  I  took  out  of  the  library  of 
this  House,  that,  as  to  the  oaths,  they  were  repealed  by  1st 
William  and  Mary,  section  1,  chapter  1.  That  act  altered  the 
form  of  the  Oath  of  Supremacy;  therefore,  it  was  an  oath 
asserting  affirmatively  that  the  supremacy  in  spiritual  matters 
was  in  the  crown,  but  that  act  negatives  the  foreign  suprema- 
cy or  spiritual  jurisdiction.  So  stood  the  statute  law  until  the 
period  of  the  Legislative  Union  with  Ireland.  At  that  pe- 
riod, in  my  humble  opinion,  an  alteration  took  place  in  the 
efi'ect  of  the  statute  law.  I  respectfully  submit,  that  at  that 
period  this  alteration  took  place  in  the  law — that  whereas,  by 
this  statute  of  Charles  II.,  and  by  that  of  1st  WiUiam  and 
Mary,  pains,  penalties  and  disabilities  were  enacted  against 
any  man  for  sitting  and  voting  without  having  taken  the 
oaths,  the  direction  of  the  act  of  Union  was,  that  every  man 
should  take  the  oaths,  but  it  imposed  no  pains,  penalties  or 
disabihties.  I  submit  that  the  statute  of  Charles  the  Second 
could  not  operate  upon  this  parhament ;  that  it  was  an  act  of 
the  Enghsh  parhament;  even  a  statute  passed  after  the 
union  with  Scotland,  could  not  operate ;  nothing  can  operate 
in  this  parliament  but  a  Union  statute,  or  a  statute  subse- 
quent to  the  Union.  This  seems  to  me  a  perfectly  plain  propo- 
sition, such  as  no  lawyer  can  controvert,  and  such  as  no  judge 


CLAIMING  A  SEAT  IN  PAELIAMENT.  155 

could  possiblj  overrule.  First,  then,  I  claim  to  sit  and  vote 
without  taking  the  oaths,  by  virtue  of  the  Uuion  Act.  Sec- 
ondly, I  claim  under  the  Erchef  Bill  to  sit  and  vote  without 
subscribing  the  Declaration.  Thirdly,  I  claim  under  the  Re- 
Hef  Bill  to  sit  and  vote  without  taking  the  Oath  of  Supre- 
macy :  and,  fourthly,  I  claim,  under  the  positive  enactments 
of  the  ReHef  Bill,  to  sit  and  vote  without  taking  any  other 
oath  than  that  mentioned  in  the  Relief  Bill  itself.  I  will  en- 
deavor to  go  through  these  four  topics  as  briefly  as  pos- 
sible. 

The  Union  Act,  as  I  before  remarked,  certainly  directed 
the  oaths  to  be  taken,  but  with  equal  certainty  it  did  not  an- 
nex pains  or  penalties  in  not  taking  them.  It  did,  however, 
direct  them  to  be  taken,  and  it  is  for  the  House  to  determine 
whether  it  has  authority  to  prevent  any  man  from  exercising 
the  right  of  representation  without  taking  those  oaths.  I  do 
not  mean  to  canvass  that  point  at  great  length  :  I  do  not 
mean  to  concede  it,  because  I  cannot ;  I  state  that  there  are 
precedents  passed  suh  silentio,  where  gentlemen  after  the  Union 
having  neglected  to  take  the  oaths,  private  acts  were  brought 
in  for  their  rehef.  But  I  put  it  to  the  House  in  its  judicial 
capacity ;  and,  having  put  it,  I  shall  have  it  at  once,  whether 
the  Union  Act,  not  having  given  the  power  of  depriving  a  rep- 
resentative of  his  right  to  sit  and  vote,  the  House  could  do  it 
of  its  own  authority,  without  the  warrant  of  an  express  law. 
I  would  respectfully  remind  honorable  members  that  this  oath 
is  a  species  of  disherison  of  the  pubhc  at  large ;  I  would 
remind  them  also,  that  those  thus  rendered  inehgible  are  ren- 
dered inehgible  for  no  other  reason  than  the  conscientious 
respect  to  the  sacred  obhgation  of  an  oath.  It  excludes  a 
meritorious  class,  and  admits  all  who  neglect  or  disregard  the 
sanction  to  which  I  have  referred ;  it  calls  upon  the  people  to 
elect  the  careless,  the  fearless,  the  mendacious,  and  it  proceeds 
upon  the  bad  principle  of  making  a  selection  of  the  vicious  to 
the  exclusion  of  the  conscientious.  That  being  the  spuit  and 
principle  of  the  law,  I  humbly  submit  to  the  House  whether 
it  would  carry  that  spirit  and  principle  into  specific  execution. 
I  think  if  I  stood  on  the  Act  of  Union  alone,  I  should  stand 
firmly  in  this  assembly  of  Christians  and  gentlemen,  calling 


156  SELECT  SPEECHES   OF    DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

upon  them  not  to  give  effect  to  that  \dcious  principle — not  to 
encourage 

"The  strong  antipathy  of  bad  to  good  ;" 

not  to  promote  the  choice  of  such  as  are  hostile  to  those  who 
reverence  the  sacred  obligation  of  an  oath,  but  to  throw  open 
the  doors  as  wide  as  possible  to  all  who  will  illustrate  this 
assembly  by  then'  virtues  and  their  talents.  I  quit  that 
point  and  come  to  the  next,  to  which  I  revert  with  pleasure, 
I  found  it  on  the  Relief  Bill. 

I  insist  that  the  effect  of  this  Eehef  BiU  is  to  do  away  with  the 
direction  of  the  Union  Act,  as  far  as  it  relates  to  oaths.  I  will 
canvass  that  proposition  first.  The  Union  Act  directed  that 
these  oaths  should  be  taken  for  a  particular  period,  and  for  a 
particular  period  only.  The  direction  is,  "And  every  member 
of  the  House  of  Commons  in  the  United  Kingdom,  in  the  first 
and  all  succeeding  parliaments,  shall,  until  the  Parhament  of 
the  United  Kingdom  shall  otherwise  provide,  take  the  oaths," 
etc.  I  contend  that  this  direction  is  at  an  end — upon  this 
direction  depends  the  Oath  of  Supremacy,  and  my  argument  is 
that  the  period  is  arrived.  The  statute  uses  the  adverb  "  un- 
til " — the  provision  was  merely  temporary  and  the  period  has 
expked.  The  Act  of  Union  provides  that  certain  oaths  shall 
be  taken  until  something  shall  happen.  Has  that  happened  ? 
That  is  the  only  question.  Let  me  see  whether  I  can  give  an 
answer  to  the  question.  I  say  it  has  :  that  is  my  assertion, 
and  how  do  I  prove  it  ?  I  take  up  the  statute  and  I  find — 
what  ?  that  the  Declaration  is  forever  abolished.  Has  not  the 
House,  in  the  words  of  the  Act  of  Union,  "  otherwise  provided  ?" 
This  is  a  penal  and  restrictive  act :  it  is  restrictive  of  the  peo- 
ple's right.  I  take  up  the  statute  and  I  see  that  the  Parha- 
ment has  otherwise  provided — not  for  Catholics  alone — ^not 
for  Protestants  alone ;  but  for  Catholics,  Dissenters,  and  Pro- 
testants— all  without  hmitation  or  restriction.  That  the  pe- 
riod has  arrived,  I  have  distinct  evidence  in  what  happened  to 
myself  at  the  table.  The  oaths  then  tendered  to  me  were  dif- 
ferent from  those  which  would  have  been  tendered  before  the 
13th  of  April ;  the  document  produced  was  new  :  it  was  fresh 
for  the  occasion  ;  it  was  a  novel  introduction  into  the  House. 


CLAIMING  A   SEAT  IN  PARLIAMENT.  157 

On  one  side  were  the  oaths  for  Protestants,  and  on  the  other 
those  for  the  CathoHcs  :  and  why  was  this  ?  Because  the 
Legislature  has  "otherwise  provided"  than  at  the  date  of 
Union.  As  one  of  the  representatives  of  the  people,  I  claim 
the  benefit  of  the  provision :  I  claim  to  come  not  within  any 
of  the  oaths.  If  the  new  provision  has  not  embraced  every 
case,  it  is  either  the  wisdom  or  defect  of  the  act ;  but  either 
in  one  case  or  in  the  other,  the  time  contemplated  has  come, 
and  I  claim  my  right  just  as  if  the  Union  statute  did  not  ex- 
ist. But  suppose  that  what  I  have  said  has  not  convinced 
the  House,  let  me  call  its  attention  to  the  bill,  and  remind  the 
House  that  in  construing  it,  there  are  general  principles  of 
common  sense  to  enable  us  to  decide  on  the  construction  of  a 
statute,  as  well  as  any  bench  of  judges  to  decide  on  any  intri- 
cate point  of  law. 

Previously  to  the  Union  and  to  the  passing  of  the  act  of 
30  Charles  11.,  the  object  of  the  Legislature  was  to  prevent 
Papists  from  sitting  and  voting  in  parhament,  and  any  deci- 
sion of  the  House  upon  that  statute  must  be  a  decision  ancil- 
lary to  that  object.  The  object  of  the  statute  of  Charles  was 
to  exclude  Papists ;  but  here  is  now  before  me  a  statute  whose 
object  is  to  open  the  doors  to  the  Roman  CathoUcs,  and  to 
annihilate  the  bar  that  has  hitherto  impeded  their  progress. 
First,  I  say,  that  this  Eehef  Bill,  like  many  others,  sometimes 
takes  up  a  portion  of  the  subject  in  the  middle — then  it  goes 
at  once  to  the  commencement,  and  again  reverts  to  some  other 
part  of  the  subject :  at  all  events  it  is  not  so  methodical  in  its 
construction  as  to  enable  me  to  give  at  once  an  analysis  of  its 
contents.  The  second  section  provides  for  the  case  of  all 
Roman  Catholics  being  peers,  and  it  enables  them  to  sit  and 
vote  on  taking  the  new  oaths.  It  applies  as  well  to  the  peers 
created  in  the  period  that  intervened  between  the  statute  of 
Charles  II.  and  the  present  day,  as  to  those  peers  whose  titles 
and  rights  existed  prior  to  that  statute  ;  of  these  there  were  two 
who  were  deprived,  I  may  now  say,  because  it  has  been  admitted 
in  the  Legislature,  by  an  unjust  attainder — Lord  Kenmare  and 
Lord  Baron  Ffrench.  They  were  created  peers  during  the  period 
when  it  was  impossible  for  either  of  them  to  exercise  the  right 
of  the  peerage  by  sitting  and  voting  in  parliament.     This  act 


158  SELECT  SPEECHES    OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

lias  admitted  them  to  those  rights.  As  the  prerogative  of  the 
Crown  has  been  restored  to  its  full  eifect  by  means  of  this  stat- 
ute, so  the  right  of  representation  has  been  made  an  equal 
right :  as  the  royal  prerogative  has  been  perfectly  successful, 
the  privilege  of  the  people  ought  to  be  equally  potential. 
There  are,  however,  these  words  in  the  second  section :  "  or 
who  shall  after  the  commencement  of  the  act  be  returned  as 
a  member  of  the  House  of  Commons  to  sit  and  vote  in  either 
House  of  Parhament  respectively."  After  the  passing  of  the 
act  everybody  is  to  be  entitled  to  the  benefit ;  and  I  beg  the 
House  to  reflect  that  if  I  be  not  by  the  second  section  included, 
I  am  not  excluded  by  it ;  though  it  does  not  affirmatively  estab- 
lish my  right,  it  does  not  negative  it  by  any  enactment ;  it  may 
not  be  sufficient  to  admit  me,  but  there  is  nothing  to  shut  me 
out.  One  point  alone  includes  me,  and  it  is  a  point  of  legal 
construction,  depending  on  the  authority  of  cases  which  I 
shall  not  now  analyze.  I  might  do  so  as  a  lawyer,  were  I  ad- 
dressing a  bench  of  judges,  but  before  a  popular  assembly,  I 
ought  not  to  occupy  time  in  any  such  attempt.  I  only  allude 
to  them  in  order  that  if  a  court  should  hereafter  decide  that 
my  argument  is  valid,  it  would  impose  upon  me  the  necessity 
of  taking  no  oaths  at  all,  or  else  protect  me  against  the  exac- 
tion of  the  penalty. 

The  construction  which  a  lawyer  may  put  upon  the  statute, 
I  apprehend,  would  be,  that  he  who  was  returned  before  the 
passing  of  the  act,  was  embraced  within  its  provisions ;  and 
the  House  will  give  me  leave  just  to  mention  that  it  has  lately 
been  solemnly  decided  in  the  case  of  a  will,  that  notwithstand- 
ing the  pecuHar  wording  of  it,  children  born  after  the  date  of 
the  instrument,  were  included  in  its  provisions.  I  will  only 
remind  the  House  of  these  tech'nical  rules,  which  I  trust  will 
never  be  carried  into  effect  at  the  expense  of  any  whom  I  am 
addressing.  I  repeat,  that  if  the  second  section  does  not 
include,  it  does  not  exclude  me.  It  may  be  said  that  it  was 
framed  for  other  objects — to  let  in  persons  who  have  claims 
like  those  of  the  Earl  of  Surrey ;  and  here  let  me  claim  the 
assistance  of  the  legal  gentlemen  in  the  House.  Beyond  a 
doubt — and  I  call  their  particular  attention  to  the  fact — if  the 
second  section  does  not  aid  me,  it  cannot  possibly  injure  my 


CLALVIING  A   SEAT   IN   PARLIAMENT.  159 

right  to  sit  and  vote.     I  come  then  at  once  to  the  ri"-ht I 

come  to  it  under  the  tenth  section  of  the  act ;  and  I  implore 
you  to  forgive  me  for  trespassing  so  long  upon  other  matters, 
when  I  have  this  section  before  me,  which  seems  to  render 
doubt  impossible. 

"And  be  it  enacted,  that  it  shall  be  lawful  for  any  of  his  Majesty's 
subjects  professing  the  Koman  Catholic  religion,  to  hold,  exercise,  and 
enjoy  all  civil  and  miHtary  offices  and  places  of  trust  and  profit  under 
his  Majesty,  his  heii's  or  successors,  and  to  exercise  any  other  franchise 
or  civil  right,  except  as  hereinafter  excepted,  upon  taking  and  sub- 
scribing at  the  times  and  in  the  manner  hereinafter  mentioned,  the  oath 
hereinbefore  apj)ointed  and  set  forth,  instead  of  the  oaths  of  allegiance,  su- 
premacy, and  abjuration,  and  instead  of  such  other  oath  or  oaths  as  are, 
or  may  be,  now  by  law  requii-ed  to  be  taken  for  the  purpose  aforesaid, 
by  any  of  his  Majesty's  subjects  professing  the  Eoman  CathoHc  rehgion." 

I  claim  the  benej&t  of  that  section ;  it  is  plain  and  distinct, 
and  includes  no  technical  subtleties ;  there  is  nothing  to 
throw  a  cloud  over  its  clearness,  and  having  read  it,  I  might 
stand  upon  that  alone.  If  then  I  touch  upon  other  matters, 
it  is  only  because,  not  having  the  right  of  reply,  it  is  necessary 
for  me  to  endeavor  to  anticipate.  If,  in  my  anxiety  to  remove 
all  objections  and  obstacles,  I  attribute  to  honorable  members 
weak  arguments  they  would  not  have  used,  and  which  they 
may  gravely  disclaim,  I  hope  I  shall  be  forgiven.  This  sec- 
tion introduces  the  francliise ;  in  common  parlance,  indeed, 
the  franchise  was  introduced  before,  because  the  fifth  section 
provides  that  Koman  Catholics  shall  vote  at  all  elections  of 
cities,  counties,  and  towns  ;  and  it  provides  a  new  oath  to  be 
taken.  Therefore  as  far  as  franchise  can  mean  the  elective 
franchise,  the  act  is  so  intentionally  extensive,  that  it  uses  the 
word  unnecessarily,  perhaps,  again.  Nay,  more,  the  franchise 
connected  with  corporations  is  actually  mentioned  again  in 
the  fourth  section  ;  thus  in  the  fifth  section  it  means  one  sj^e- 
cies  of  franchise,  in  the  tenth  section  another,  and  in  the  four- 
teenth a  third.  For  fear  any  franchise  should  be  omitted 
and  forgotten,  lest  any  party  should  by  chance  be  excluded 
from  the  benefits,  which  I  hope  and  trust  will  flow  from  the 
act,  the  word  franchise  is  to  be  found  in  three  different  parts 
of  it.     It  then  goes  on  to  give  all  civil  rights,  excepting  such 


180  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL    O'CONNELL. 

as  are  hereinafter  mentioned.  The  first  question  is,  whether 
the  right  of  sitting  and  voting  in  parhament  be  hereinafter 
excepted  ?  I  meet  that  with  a  direct  negative — it  is  not ;  but 
there  are  offices  excepted  in  the  twelfth  section,  such  as  guar- 
dians and  justices  of  the  United  Kingdom,  the  Eegent  of  the 
United  Kingdom,  Lord  High  Chancellor,  Lord  Keeper,  Lord 
Lieutenant  of  Ireland,  and  High  Commissioner  to  the  General 
Assembly  of  the  Church  of  Scotland.  In  the  fifteenth  section 
also,  the  civil  rights  are  excepted,  which  might  be  exercised 
for  ecclesiastical  promotion,  and  for  presentation  to  livings  in 
the  gift  of  corporations.  These  do  not  include  the  right  for 
which  I  contend,  and  I  shall  not  detain  the  House  by  going 
through  the  act  more  minutely.  I  have  read  it  attentively, 
and  I  can  assert  that  I  find  in  it  no  such  exception.  I  shall 
be  asked,  perhaps,  whether  the  right  to  sit  and  vote  be  a  civil 
right  ?  And  I  would  reply,  if  I  Avere  permitted  to  do  so,  by 
asking  another  question — if  it  be  not  a  civil  right,  what  is 
it  ?  I  have  looked  into  law  books  with  a  view  to  this  ques- 
tion of  civil  right,  and  I  find  that  Mr.  Justice  Blackstone,  in 
his  Commentaries,  has  divided  the  whole  law  into  rights  and 
wrongs.  On  the  front  of  his  book  is  found  the  very  right  to 
sit  and  vote  in  parliament.  But  I  appeal  to  common  sense 
and  common  understanding,  is  it  not  a  civil  right  ?  Must  it 
not  be  a  civil  right  ?  In  the  section  itself  I  find  civil  contra- 
distinguished from  military — that  Roman  Catholics  may  "  en- 
joy all  civil  and  mihtary  offices."  The  section  itself,  therefore, 
explains  the  meaning  of  the  term.  But,  travelling  out  of  the 
section,  and  resorting  to  those  who  have  best  defined  the  mean- 
ing of  the  words  in  the  EngHsli  language,  what  do  we  find  ? 
Dr.  Johnson  tells  us  that  "  civil  "  is  an  adjective  which  means 
"relating  to  the  community,"  "political:  relating  to  the  city 
or  government."  Now,  "  political "  and  "  civil "  must,  by  the 
by,  mean  the  same  thing ;  the  only  difference  being  that  one 
word  is  from  the  Greek,  and  the  other  from  the  Latin.  They 
are  synonymous  and  identical,  and  no  man  can  deny  that  sit- 
ting and  voting  is  both  a  pohtical  and  civil  right. 

The  example  given  by  Spratt  fully  su})ports  this  assertion — 
"but  there  is  another  unity  which  would  be  most  advanta- 
geous to  our  country,  and  that  is  your  endeavor,  a  civil  politi- 
cal union  in  the  whole  nation." 


CLAIMINa    A   SEAT  IN  PARLIAMENT.  161 

The  definition  and  description  necessarily  include  the 
right  I  claim  ;  but  let  us  see  what  is  the  definition  of  that 
word  "right."  After  giving  other  significations,  Dr.  Johnson 
proceeds  to  the  third  sense  of  "  right,"  which  is  "  claim,"  and 
he  follows  it  by  others,  such  as  :  "  that  which  justly  be- 
longs to  one," — "property,  interest," — "power,  prerogative," 
— "  immunity,  privilege," — in  short,  there  is  not  one  of  these 
significations  that  is  more  comprehensive  than  I  deske  it  to 
be.  He  inserts  the  following  example  of  Sir  Walter  Raleigh, 
of  "just  claim."  "The  Roman  Catholic  citizens  were,  by  the 
sword,  taught  to  acknowledge  the  Pope  their  Lord,  though 
they  knew  not  by  what  right."  This  is  a  plain  definition  and 
description  of  civil  right.  It  cannot  mean  "  franchise,"  because 
franchisement  has  ah-eady  been  included — it  cannot  mean 
"  property,"  because  property  is  included  in  the  twenty-third 
section  of  the  act,  which  requires  no  oath  at  all  for  enjoyment 
of  it : — from  and  after  the  passage  of  this  act,  no  oath  or 
oaths  shall  be  tendered  to,  or  required  to  be  taken  by,  his 
Majesty's  subjects  professing  the  Roman  Cathohc  religion,  for 
enabhng  them  to  hold  or  enjoy  any  real  or  personal  property." 
Thus,  then,  "  civil  right,"  in  this  act,  does  not  mean  proper- 
ty ;  it  does  not  mean  franchise,  but  it  means,  a  just  claim,  a 
political  privilege,  an  immunity  of  any  kind  whatever.  Com- 
mon sense  here  shows  what  the  law  sanctions — that  by  civil 
right,  necessarily  must  be  included  the  right  to  sit  and  vote. 
Another  observation  is,  that  this  section  relates  to  the  time 
and  manner  of  taking  the  oaths;  but  suppose  I  were  to  concede 
that  no  time  and  manner  are  expressed,  yet  the  civil  right 
being  granted  under  the  oaths  directed,  and  the  time  and  man- 
ner being  the-  only  condition,  necessarily  would  supply  the 
condition.  "W^e  have  in  the  nineteenth  section  the  mode  of 
taking  the  oaths  for  corporate  offices,  and  in  the  twentieth,  the 
time  and  manner  of  taking  the  oaths  for  their  offices ;  but  I 
will  not  detain  the  House  upon  that  point,  because  in  the 
twenty-third  section  the  Legislature  has  wisely  provided  for 
the  case.     It  declares  : 

"Tliat  the  oath  herein  appointed  to  be  taken  and  subscribed  in  any  of 
the  courts,  or  before  any  of  the  persons  above-mentioned,  shall  be  of 
the  same  force  and  effect,  to  all  intents  and  jiurposes  as,  and  shall  stand 


162  SELECT  SPEECHES   OF    DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

in  the  place  of,  all  oatlis  and  declarations,  required  and  prescribed  by 
any  law  now  in  force  for  the  relief  of  his  Majesty's  Koman  Cathohc 
subjects  from  any  disabilities,  incapacities,  or  penalties." 

However,  as  there  is  no  punctuation  in  acts  of  parliament,  I 
sliall  not  trouble  tlie  House  with  any  special  pleading  on  par- 
ticular words,  but  come  to  the  remaining  and  distinct  portion 
of  the  section : 

' '  And  the  proper  officer  of  any  of  the  courts  above  mentioned,  in 
which  any  persons  professing  the  Koman  Catholic  rehgion,  shall  demand 
to  take  and  subscribe  the  oaths  herein  appointed  and  set  forth,  is  hereby 
authorized  and  required  to  administer  the  oath  to  such  person  :  and  such 
officer  shall  make,  sign,  and  deliver  a  certificate  of  such  oath  having 
been  duly  taken  and  subscribed. ' 

There  is  the  time,  and  that  time  is  when  it  is  demanded. 
The  courts  are  also  specified,  viz.,  the  King's  Bench,  Com- 
mon Pleas,  Exchequer,  and  Chancery.  The  time  is  as  univer- 
sal as  the  benefit  of  the  statute  was  intended  to  be,  and  every- 
thing is  complete  to  my  purpose.  The  objection  vanishes, 
because  the  time  is  as  extensive  as  can  be  demanded.  I  have 
taken  that  oath  in  one  of  the  courts  named.  I  am  ready  to 
prove  it.  I  produced  the  certificate  at  the  table  ;  and  having 
taken  that  oath,  and  produced  that  certificate,  I  turn  round 
and  ask,  why  am  I  not  allowed  to  exercise  my  rights  ?  Let  it 
be  remembered  that  my  case  cannot  be  drawn  into  precedent ; 
it  can  never  occur  again  ;  and  I  ask  the  House,  in  construing 
the  act,  whether  it  intends  to  make  it  an  outlawry  against  a 
single  individual.  If  the  act  were  meant  to  meet  my  case, 
why  was  not  my  case  specified  in  it  ?  It  existed  when  the 
act  was  passed :  it  was  upon  the  records  of  the  House,  for  a 
committee  had  sat  while  the  biH  was  pending,  and  had  given 
in  its  report  upon  oath.  Why,  I  ask  again,  was  not  my  case 
specified  ?  Because  it  was  not  intended  to  be  included  ? 
Where,  then,  is  the  individual  who  would  think  it  ought  to  be 
included  ?  Let  me  call  the  attention  of  the  House  tp  the  re- 
cital of  the  statute. 

"  Whereas,  by  various  acts  of  parliament,  certain  restraints  and  disa- 
bilities are  imposed  on  the  Boman  Catholic  subjects  of  his  Majesty,  to 
which  other  of  his  Majesty's  subjects  are  not  liable, " 


CLAIMING   A  SEAT  IN  PARLIAMENT.  163 

It  includes  all  restraints  and  disabilities  affecting  Koman 
Catholics  ;  and  proceeds — 

*'  And  whereas  it  is  expedient  that  such  restraints  and  disabilities  shall 
be  henceforth  discontinued  ;  and  whereas  by  various  acts,  certain  oaths 
and  certain  declarations,  etc.,  are  or  may  be  required  to  be  taken,  made, 
and  subscribed  by  the  subjects  of  his  Majesty,  as  qualifications  for  sitting 
and  voting  in  parliament,  and  for  the  enjoyment  of  certain  offices,  fran- 
chises, and  civil  rights  ;  Be  it  enacted,  etc.,  that  such  restraints  and  dis- 
abilities shall  be  from  henceforth  discontinued. " 

All  are  to  be  discontinued.  Wliat  do  I  claim  ?  That  they 
shall  be  discontinued.  It  is  a  maxim  of  law  that  the  recital  of 
statute  shall  not  control  the  enactments ;  but  with  this  qualifi- 
cation, that  although  a  particular  recital  cannot  control  a  gen- 
eral enactment,  there  is  no  rule  of  law  that  a  general  recital 
shall  not  explain  a  particular  enactment.  But  I  have  a  gen- 
eral recital,  and  a  general  enactment  too,  in  my  favor. 

If  to  sit  and  vote  be  not  a  civil  right,  what  civil  right  was 
intended  by  the  word,  for  every  other  is  provided  for  ?  Why 
should  this  be  excluded  ?  Look  at  the  recital  and  look  at  the 
intention  of  the  statute,  and  shall  I  then  be  told  that  a  doubt 
can  arise  as  to  the  right  to  sit  and  vote  ?  If  I  have  not  that  right, 
what  is  to  be  done '?  Is  the  statute  of  Charles  II.,  enabling 
the  House  to  exclude  me,  still  in  force  ?  What  is  to  become 
of  me  ?  Am  I  to  remain  the  representative  for  Clare  ?  Will 
the  House  not  let  me  in,  and  is  not  able  to  turn  me  out  ? 
What,  I  ask  again,  is  to  become  of  me?  The  statute  of 
Charles  II.  imposed  penalties  for  not  taking  the  oaths  and 
signing  the  declaration  :  among  others  there  was  a  pecuniary 
penalty,  and  it  continued  in  force  until  the  union  with  Ireland. 
The  first  question  I  would  ask  the  lawyers  of  the  House  then 
is  this  :  Did  the  Union  Act  continue  those  penalties  ?  I  take 
upon  me  to  say  it  did  not.  Then,  I  ask,  can  any  penalty  or 
punishment  ba  continued  on  a  free-born  British  subject, 
when  an  Act  of  Parhament,  like  that  of  the  Union,  is  silent, 
and  contains  no  enactment  as  to  penalty  ?  That  is  a  question 
of  constitutional  law ;  and  if  I  were  sued  to-morrow  for  the 
penalty  of  five  hundred  pounds,  I  should,  of  course,  instantly 
demur.  If  I  am  right  in  that  position — if  the  penalty  of  five 
hundred  pounds  could  not  be  recovered,  shall  the  greater  inflic- 


164:  SELECT  SPEECHES   OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

tion  remain  ?  Wlien  courts  of  justice  would  refuse  to  enforce 
the  fine,  shall  this  House  take  the  law  into  its  own  hands  and 
deprive  me  of  what  ought  to  be  more  precious — the  right  to 
sit  and  vote  as  the  representative  of  a  divided,  a  disinherited, 
and,  I  had  almost  said,  a  martyred  people. 

The  Union  statute,  I  apprehend,  would  alone  be  sufficient ; 
but  I  do  not  stand  on  that  merely.  This  Relief  Bill  has  abol- 
ished the  oaths  and  Declaration,  and  abolished  with  it  the  pun- 
ishment for  not  taking  the  one  and  subscribing  the  other.  If 
the  Declaration  be  abolished,  does  the  pecuniary  penalty  re- 
main ?  I  answer,  no.  And  if  the  pecuniary  penalty  do  not 
remain,  does  the  heavier  penalty  of  exclusion  continue  ?  Cer- 
tainly not ;  and  I  respectfully  submit  to  the  House  that  it  has 
not  now  jurisdiction  to  prevent  the  exercise  of  my  civil  right 
of  sitting  and  voting  here.  I  acknowledge  that  I  should  take 
the  oath  prescribed  by  the  Relief  Bill ;  and  then  let  any  indi- 
vidual, by  favor  of  justice,  bring  an  action  against  me,  and  if 
the  court  should  determine  that  I  ought  to  pay  the  penalty  of 
.£500,  my  exclusion  follows  as  a  matter  of  course.  The  House 
should  consider  that  this  is  a  large  and  comprehensive  enact- 
ment ;  and  I  ask  why  the  House  should  interfere  in  my  case, 
and  not  leave  it  to  the  courts  of  justice  ?  I  do  not  want  this 
House  to  -yield  its  privileges  to  the  decision  of  any  court  or 
tribunal  in  existence ;  but  I  wish  to  show  that  the  House,  by 
deciding  with  me,  could  not  preclude  anybody  from  trying  the 
question  legally.  It  is  to  put  my  case  into  that  transfer  of 
decision  that  I  am  arguing  here  :  that  is  the  utmost  I  strug- 
gle for.  The  question  is  :  Is  it  not  my  right  on  this  return  to 
take  the  seat  to  which  I  have  been  duly  elected  by  the  people? 
Is  the  question  free  from  doubt  ?  If  there  be  a  doubt,  I  am 
entitled  to  the  benefit  of  that  doubt. 

I  maintain  that  I  have  a  constitutional  right,  founded  on 
the  return  of  the  sheriff  and  the  voice  of  the  people ;  and  if 
there  be  a  doubt  on  the  subject  it  should  be  removed.  The 
statute  comes  before  us  to  be  construed  from  the  first  clause. 
I  did — and  I  am  not  ashamed  to  own  it — I  did  defer  to  the 
opinion  of  others,  and  was  averse  to  calling  for  that  construc- 
tion ;  and  if  it  had  not  been  for  the  interest  of  those  who  sent 
me  here,  my  own  right  should  have  been  bui'ied  in  obHvion. 


SPEECH  AT  THE  SECOND  CLARE  ELECTION.        165 

But  now  I  require  the  House  to  consider  it.  Will  you  decide 
that  a  civil  right  does  not  mean  a  civil  right  ?  And  if  this 
case  of  mine  be  not  excepted,  wUl  you  add  it  as  an  additional 
exception  ?  It  might  have  been  said  by  some  of  those  who 
supported  the  bill,  that  it  was  intended  by  that  measure  to 
compensate  a  nation  for  bygone  wrongs,  and  to  form  the 
foundation  stone  of  a  solid  and  substantial  building,  to  be 
consecrated  to  the  unity  and  peace  of  the  empire.  But  if 
what  is  certain  may  be  disturbed — if  what  words  express  may 
be  erased — if  civil  rights  may  be  determined  not  to  be  civil 
rights — if  we  are  to  be  told  that  by  some  excuse,  or  by  some 
pretext,  what  is  not  uncertain  may  be  made  so — we  shall  be 
put  under  an  impossibihty  to  know  what  construction  we  must 
hereafter  place  on  the  statutes.  I  have  endeavored  to  treat 
this  House  with  respect.  My  title  to  sit  in  it  is  clear  and 
plain ;  and  I  contend  that  the  statute  is  all  comprehensive  in  its 
intention,  in  its  recital,  and  in  its  enactments.  It  comprehends 
every  measure  and  principle  of  relief,  with  such  exceptions 
as  are  thereinafter  excepted.  But  while  I  show  my  respect 
to  the  House,  I  stand  here  on  my  right,  and  claim  the  benefit 
of  it. 


SPEECH  AT  THE  SECOND  CLARE  ELECTION. 


[Mr.  O'Connell  arose  and  placed  his  hand  several  times  upon  his 
breast  during  the  acclamations,  evidently  under  the  influence  of 
powerful  emotions.] 

I  accept  the  trust,  not  with  any  presumptuous  confidence  in 
my  own  abiUties,  but  simply  with  an  honesty  of  intuition,  and 
purity  of  motive.  We  have  procured  Emancipation,  from  the 
moral  condition  of  the  people,  from  that  high  enhghtenment 
they  had  acqmred  from  their  submission,  their  obedience  to 
the  laws,  from  their  respect  to  the  many  ordinances  of  man 
and  laws  of  God. 

It  was  impossible  that  that  measure  could  be  any  lougf^r 
withheld — but  I  complain  of  the  results  of  that  measure;  I 


166  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF    DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

complain  that  since  it  has  passed,  four  months  have  now 
elapsed  and  there  has  not  been  an  effort  employed  on  the 
part  of  the  government,  nor  any  disposition  manifested  to  do 
away  with  the  distinctions  which  then  existed  and  which  still 
continue  to  exist  in  the  country.  No,  they  are  still  kept  ahve 
as  much  as  ever,  and  up  to  the  period  at  which  I  now  speak, 
there  does  not  appear  a  single  Cathohc  who  has  derived  the 
least  benefit  from  the  measure.  In  speaking  of  your  having 
elected  me  now,  I  shall  stUl  point  out  to  you — I  feel  it  my  duty 
to  do  so — the  injustice  which  has  been  done  to  you  and  me 
when  the  last  election  was  made  the  subject  of  discussion  in 
the  House,  and  I  must  say  that  it  has  anything  but  my 
respect  or  submission  upon  that  occasion.  I  heard  the  inso- 
lent opinion  of  the  speaker  pronounced,  and,  though  I  am 
well  aware  of  the  little  and  contemptible  motives  by  which  he 
was  actuated ;  although  I  am  well  aware  that  they  are  of  that 
description  which  the  character  of  the  sex  from  which  they 
emanated  should  consign  to  silence,  I  shall  not  say  anything 
more  about  them  now,  but  the  time  shall  come  when  with 
your  voice  I  wiU  bring  this  matter  forth.  Upon  that  occa- 
sion, too,  I  have  to  complain  of  the  conduct  of  a  certain  pro- 
fession, a  profession  to  which  I  once  considered  it  an  honor  to 
belong.     I  allude  to  the  profession  of  the  bar. 

The  bar,  in  my  opinion,  have  disgraced  themselves  in  the 
discussion  of  my  case,  before  the  House  of  Commons.  I  put 
forward,  upon  that  occasion,  my  opinions  as  to  my  right  to  sit 
and  vote.  I  proved  my  right  to  sit  and  vote  by  the  existing 
law.  There  was  not  one  who  came  forward  either  by  pam- 
phlet or  letter  to  contradict  my  statement.  If  they  had  done 
so  in  print,  I  would  immediately  have  annihilated  them.  Mr. 
Sugden  committed  one  of  the  most  egregious  errors  that  ever 
a  lawyer  of  any  country  was  guilty  of,  upon  that  occasion. 
Mr.  Tyndal  waited,  and  in  a  dry,  hum-drum  form  of  a  speech 
in  parliament,  opposed  me.  It  was  a  poor,  miserable  attempt  at 
a  speech,  and  this  man  has  since  become  the  Lord  Chief-Jus- 
tice of  England.  That  country  is  to  be  pitied  that  has  such  a 
judge.  It  is  melancholy  to  reflect  that  elevation  can  be  easily 
procured  by  abandonment  of  principle.  There  was  another 
who  opposed  me — Mr.  Sugden,  one  who  has  lately  made  him- 


SPEECH  AT  THE  SECOND  CLARE  ELECTION.        167 

self  very  remarkable  by  some  ridiculous  observ^ation,  but 
whose  name  lias  not  been  introduced  to-day.  He  committed 
an  egregious  blunder,  and  I  nailed  it  to  him.  The  first  who 
opposed  me,  has  since  become  a  Chief-Justice,  whilst  another 
has  been  appointed  his  Majesty's  Attorney-General  for  Eng- 
land. 

I  cannot  express  the  sentiments  of  abhorrence  and  contempt 
I  entertain  for  the  opinion  pronounced  by  Sir  James  Scarlett. 
He  was  favorable  in  opinion  to  me,  so  much  so  that  Mr.  Hut- 
chinson, the  member  for  Mallow,  and  others,  told  me  they 
were  convinced  by  the  reasonings  of  Sir  James  Scarlett ;  yet 
this  man  afterwards  voted  against  me.  Thus  I  was  put  down 
by  parhamentary  magic  and  two  la^vyers,  both  of  whom  are 
promoted,  and  one  of  whom  advocated  my  cause  at  one  period. 
I  must,  however,  do  justice  to  that  portion  of  the  profession 
who  acted  nobly,  consistently,  and  honorably.  I  cannot  be 
unmindful  of  the  splendid  aid  of  Henry  Brougham,  that  man 
of  unrivalled  talent,  who  possesses  more  information  than  any 
other  man  I  ever  met.  Oh,  yes ;  it  gladdens  my  heart  to 
reflect  that  I  had  such  a  man  at  my  side,  the  brightest  orna- 
ment in  the  British  House  of  Commons,  the  statesman,  the 
orator,  the  lawyer,  the  man  of  science,  and  the  philosopher. 
There  were  others  too  who  supported  me.  I  cannot  omit  the 
names  of  Duncannon,  Ebrington,  of  Rice,  of  Lloyd. 

[Yes,  and  said  some  individual,  the  Knight  of  Kerry..] 

Oh  ;  as  to  the  Knight  of  Kerry,  I  hardly  consider  it  a 
debt  I  owe  him,  to  enumerate  his  distinguished  name,  one  of 
the  most  honest  men  who  ever  entered  into  the  House  of  Com- 
mons. There  were  also  many  who  supported  me  among  the 
high  famihes  of  England.  The  illustrious  name  of  Grey  can 
never  be  forgotten  by  me.  I  had  his  distinguished  support. 
The  decision,  notwithstanding  all,  was  against  me.  It  was  a 
decision  in  the  face  of  the  law.  I  told  them  so  before  the  bar 
of  the  House — that  there  was  an  injustice  done  me,  and  an 
injustice  in  my  person  done  to  you.  As  far  as  I  am  concerned 
nothing  shall  prevent  me  tearing  away  the  veil  and  showing 
the  administration  in  all  its  naked  deformity,  for  the  purpose 
of  saving  the  country  for  the  King  and  the  people.     I  shall 


168  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

next  allude  to  the  destruction  of  tlie  Catholic  Association.  It 
certainly  reminds  me — in  truth  it  does,  of  the  immortal  Alexan- 
der,  who  "  twice  had  slew  the  slain," — it  was  a  most  unneces- 
sary measure,  for  the  Association  had  previously  performed  a 
virtual  suicide.  It  was  frightful  to  consider  the  consequence 
of  that  act ;  it  is  a  despotic  power  put  into  tlie  hands  of  the 
Viceroy,  and  I  complain  of  it  because  it  bears,  without  dis- 
tinction, upon  all  classes.  I  shall  not  be  one  fortnight  in  the 
House  until  I  call  for  its  repeal.  I  shall  demand,  too,  the  re- 
peal of  that  act  which  deprived  the  virtuous  forty-shilling 
freeholders  of  their  franchise — an  act  which  robbed  two  hun- 
dred and  fifty  thousand  of  the  elective  franchise  in  one  day. 
The  disfranchisement  of  the  forty-shilling  freeholders  was 
a  breach  of  the  Union.  It  was  the  basis  of  the  Union  that 
the  country  should  be  represented  by  the  forty-shilling  free- 
holders among  the  constituency  of  the  country,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  placing  the  representation  of  both  kingdoms  upon  an 
equalization  ;  that  equaHzation  was  now  destroyed — the  basis 
of  the  Union  was  therefore  destroyed,  and  the  measm-e  was 
grossly  violated  in  this  instance.  Standing  here  now,  as  I  do, 
for  the  first  time,  the  undisputed  member  of  the  county  of 
Clare,  I  pledge  myseK  to  have  those  virtuous  men  restored  to 
their  rights.  As  a  favorable  result  of  emancipation,  and  a 
disposition  to  dispense  justice,  the  Ministry  point,  no  doubt, 
to  the  late  proclamation  for  the  dispersion  of  Orange  assem- 
blies. I  will  admit  this,  but  I  am  at  liberty  to  canvass  this 
proclamation ;  it  came  a  week  just  too  late.  I  went,  about  a 
week  before  the  fatal  occurrence  which  called  it  forth,  to  Lord 
Levison  Gower,  and  told  him  my  apprehensions ;  I  told  him 
I  feared,  if  some  timely  and  salutary  measures  were  not  taken, 
that  sixty  individuals,  at  least,  would  faU  victims  to  Orange 
butchery.  In  a  week  afterwards  the  proclamation  is  issued  ; 
it  reminds  me  of  the  familiar  adage,  that  "he  w^as  a  good 
servant  w^ho  locked  the  stable  door  when  the  steed  w^as  stolen." 
His  master  had  certainly  good  reason  to  congratulate  himseK 
on  the  services  of  such  a  servant.  There  was  no  proclama- 
tion as  long  as  the  people  lay  quiet,  as  long  as  they  laid  them- 
oelves  down  to  the  fury  of  the  Orange  gang,  as  long  as  they 
patiently  submitted  to  the  sword  ;  as  long  as  all  this  continued 


SPEECH  AT  THE  SECOND  CLARE  ELECTION.       169 

there  was  no  proclamation ;  but  when  the  battle  of  Mackeon 
took  place,  which  was  gallant  and  victorious  to  the  Catholics, 
then  the  proclamation  was  issued. 

I  shaU  now  address  you  on  a  subject  more  closely  allied  to 
your  feelings,  and  I  address  you  with  pain,  as  I  have  to  allude 
to  myself.     What,  I  ask,  can  I  do  for  Clare  ?     I  will  tell  you 
what  I  can't  do,  I  cannot  provide  any  one  among  you  with 
place,  pension,  or  office.     I  cannot  meet  the  expectation  of 
any  one  in  this  way.     I  don't  care  what  the  administration 
may  be,  I  shall  always  be  Hke  the  shepherd's  dog,  watching 
to  mark  where  the  rights  and  liberties  of  the  people  shall  be 
infringed  upon,  to  sound  the  alarm,  to  protect  them  from  dan- 
ger.    The  first  object  to  which  my  attention  shall  be  directed, 
is  to  hold  out  the  olive  branch  of  peace  to  all — to  reconcile 
the   temporary   separation  between  landlord  and  tenant — to 
engender  those  kindly  and  affectionate  feehngs  between  those 
respective  classes  which  ought  forever  to  exist,  and,  if  possible, 
ought  never    to   have  suffered    estrangement   or    ahenation. 
Upon  the  occasion  of  the  last  election,  there  were  many  and 
many  who  opposed  me,  who  are  now  disposed  to  give   me 
their  support — and  there  were  many  who  were   actuated  in 
that  opposition  by  the  most  honorable  motives.     There  is  Mr. 
Vesey  Fitzgerald,  too,  of  whom  I  can  scarcely  speak  in  ade- 
quate terms  of  eulogy.     I  should  be  base,  indeed,  if  I  did  not 
bestow  upon  him  the  commendations  he  deserves.     The  CatJi- 
olics  turned  him  out  of  the  county,  and  the  revenge  which  he 
practiced,  was  one  of  the  best  speeches  I  ever  heard  in  their 
favor.     It  was   one  of  the  greatest  instances   of  generosity, 
which  I  ever  before  witnessed.     I  consider  Mr.  Vesey  Fitz- 
gerald one  of  the  ablest  men  in  the  cabinet,  and  if  he  were  not 
encumbered  with  a  certain  pecuharity   approaching  to  diffi- 
dence in  his  own  jjowers,  frequently  the  companion  of  great 
merit — he  would  be  the  first  man  in  the  cabinet.     I  shall  now 
turn  to  my  pubhc  duties,  and  it  may  be  asked,  what  are  my 
qualifications  ?     I  say  it  unaffectedly,  I  am  no  orator.     I  am 
a  "  plain  blunt  man,"   who  speaks  the  plain  language.     My 
forensic  habits  have  given  me  a  facihty  in  delivering  my  sen- 
timents as  they  occur  to  my  mind,  without  humming,  or  hav- 
ing to  look  for  a  better  word.     I  have  no  pretensions  to  poetry. 


170  SELECT  SPEECHES  OE  DANIEL  o'CONNELL. 

The  Muses  have  never  hovered  over  me  with  then'  zephyr- 
auy  wings,  or  carried  me  aloft  on  those  wild  and  ethereal  voy- 
ages of  fancy  which  are  taken  by  her  favorite  votaries.  I 
come,  as  I  have  said,  to  the  House  of  Commons,  a  plain  work- 
ing man,  with  honesty  of  intentions — a  man  of  business.  That 
man  must  be  an  early  riser  who  is  up  before  me ;  and  he  must 
be  a  sober  fellow  who  goes  to  bed  with  a  more  sober  head  than 
I  do.  When  I  go  over  to  the  House  of  Commons,  it  is  my 
intention  to  be  there  from  the  moment  that  prayers  begin 
until  the  moment  that  all  the  business  is  over.  I  will  be 
the  first  in  the  House  and  I  shall  be  last  out.  I  wiU  read 
every  bill,  every  word  of  it.  I  come  now,  to  what  I  con- 
sider my  duties  with  regard  to  rehgion.  If  any  question 
should  come  before  the  House  on  the  subject  of  the  discipline 
of  the  Estabhshed  Church,  I  shall  immediately  walk  out.  I 
shall  leave  Protestants  to  deal  with  what  leads  to  their  own 
spiritual  concerns.  I  should  wish  the  same  for  myself,  and  I 
will  do  as  I  would  be  done  by.  But  with  respect  to  the  tem- 
poralities of  the  Established  Church,  that  is  totally  another 
subject.  I  should  wish  to  bring  about  a  suitable  equahzation 
of  church  property,  not  that  thousands  of  curates  should  hard- 
ly have  the  means  of  subsistence,  while  the  bishops  were  riot- 
ing in  luxury.  The  former  have  only  £75  a  year,  while  many 
of  the  bishops  have  twenty  thousand !  The  time  is  approach- 
ing when  the  system  of  tithes  must  be  abohshed.  France  is 
now  comfortable  in  the  abolition  of  its  tithes.  If  no  one  will 
introduce  the  subject,  I  will  introduce  it  myself.  I  know  that 
I  shall  have  more  Protestants  than  any  other  class  to  join  me 
in  this  measure.  I  shall  endeavor  to  put  an  end  to  the  per- 
petually returning  litigation  to  which  the  Catholics  and  Dis- 
senters are  subject,  by  these  primeval  transfers  of  deeds,  which 
were  a  consuming  gangrene  to  both  Dissenters  and  Catholics 
in  their  pubhc  charities.  I  shall  endeavor  to  protect  them  by 
the  law,  free  from  htigation.  I  go  into  parliament  for  fi'eedom 
for  all  mQp — Jew  and  GentUe,  Heathen  and  Christian.  I  ex- 
cept, however,  the  subjects  of  that  abominable  monopoly,  the 
East  India  Company,  who  still  keep  the  abominations  of  the 
idol  Juggernaut.  I  would  leave  those  j^eople  to  their  supersti- 
tions, endeavoring  to  convince  them  by  every  reasonable  argu- 


SPEECH   ON  THE  IRISH   COERCION  BILL.  173 

local  considerations,  and  liope  that  nothing  except  my  accent 
shall  on  the  occasion  discover  me  to  be  an  Irishman. 

I  stand  up  here  not  merely  to  defend  Irish  rights,  but  I 
speak  as  if  I  were  speaking  of  Enghsh,  Scotch,  or  universal 
liberty ;  in  fact,  it  is  as  a  defender  of  the  last  that  I  stand  up 
to  protest  against  certain  proceedings  which  I  understand  are 
now  in  contemplation.  Let  it  not  however  be  supposed  that 
oppression  is  the  less  abhorrent  to  me  because  I  am  less  vio- 
lent in  manner,  and  least  of  all,  it  should  not  be  supposed  that 
a  quietness  of  demeanor  on  the  part  of  a  people  is  an  indica- 
tion of  a  less  determination  of  purpose.  Death  is  preferable 
to  oppression,  and  the  people  of  Ireland,  though  tranquil,  will 
not  be  the  more  submissive  to  the  yoke  which  is  to  be  imposed 
upon  them.  For  my  own  part,  the  iron  has  not  as  yet  entered 
into  my  soul ;  and  notwithstanding  the  folly  and  the  madness 
of  the  Administration,  I  have  still  a  confiding  hope  in  the 
integrity  of  the  Reformed  House  of  Commons.  Before  I  pro- 
ceed to  the  consideration  of  a  measure,  which  has  been  intro- 
duced elsewhere,  I  wish  to  set  myseK  right  in  regard  to  some 
statements,  which  have  been  made  respecting  me.  It  has 
been  asserted  that  I  encouraged  certain  tithe  meetings,  and 
that  when  I  had  called  those  assemblages  together,  I  had 
shrunk  from  attendance.  I  here  at  once  declare  and  sohcit 
a  denial,  if  it  can  be  given,  if  there  is  any  truth  in  this  state- 
ment. In  point  of  fact,  there  is  no  truth  in  it ;  there  was  not 
only  no  such  thing,  but  there  was  no  foundation  for  it ;  and 
any  assertion  more  destitute  of  the  semblance  of  truth  was 
never  made.  The  fact  is,  that  I  was  not  even  in  Ireland  at 
the  time  of  the  meetings  referred  to,  and  could  not  by  possi- 
bility have  undertaken  to  attend ;  and  if  a  Committee  of  In- 
quiry were  granted  to  me,  I  would  undertake  to  prove  to 
demonstration,  that  the  meetings  of  which  I  am  said  to  be  the 
originator,  were  got  up  by  the  friends  of  Lord  Anglesea.  I 
was,  at  the  time,  at  the  distance  of  three  hundred  miles  fi'om 
those  meetings,  and  I  appeal  to  this  House  whether  it  is  fair 
to  impose  upon  me  the  responsibility  of  meetings  in  which  I 
had  no  concern.  Over  and  over  again  have  the  acts  of  others 
been  laid  at  my  door,  and  without  expressing  any  opinion 
upon  the  propriety  of  these  meetings,  I  ask  whether  it  is  fail 


174  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL   O'CONNELL. 

to  impute  to  me  acts  in  wliicli  I  have  had  no  participation  ?  I 
have  been  frequently  calumniated  when  I  only  asked  to  be  heard 
in  reply.  I  court  investigation  into  my  conduct,  and  I  defy 
the  most  rigid  scrutiny.  Enough,  however,  of  this  subject ;  I 
liave  something  more  important  to  attract  the  attention  of  the 
House  ;  important,  though  it  bears  the  marks  of  driveUing  old 
age,  and  the  total  absence  of  a  manly  character. 

It  would  probably  be  thought  that  some  of  the  measures  of 
government  were  of  a  healing  and  salutary  nature,  and  that 
ministers  had  shown  that  they  were  well  disposed  toward 
Ireland. 

Let  the  House  recollect  what  the  ministers  have  done. 
They  have  indeed  boasted  of  their  church  reform,  and,  as  far 
as  that  goes,  I  accept  it  as  a  boon.  What  is  it  after  all? 
The  shght  benefits  it  confers  are  prospective.  It  holds  out  no 
present  advantages.  True,  it  was  a  boon  as  far  as  the  vestry 
cess,  which,  according  to  the  statement  of  the  noble  lord,  was 
sixty  or  seventy  thousand  pounds  a  year.  The  noble  lord,  in 
statmg  that  as  the  amount  of  the  vestry  cess,  stated  also  that 
the  income  of  the  clergy  was  about  seven  hundred  thousand 
pounds.  Did  the  noble  lord,  did  any  person  who  knew  any- 
thing about  Ireland,  think  or  believe  that  the  vestry  cess 
amounted  to  one  tenth  of  the  income  of  the  Protestant  clergy 
of  Ireland  ?  Let  me,  however,  not  be  misunderstood.  I  ac- 
cept that  boon  and  accept  it  gratefully,  trifling  as  it  is.  At 
the  same  time,  I  wish  the  House  to  know  that  it  is  only  a 
small  relief  fron  large  and  vexatious  grievances.  I  do  not 
retract  one  expression  of  approbation  at  the  measure  of  the 
noble  lord,  not  because  I  think  it  of  any  benefit,  but  because 
I  recognize  in  his  mind  a  good  principle.  It  recognized  this, 
that  the  state  had  a  right  to  dispose  of  church  property,  and 
it  incidentally  admitted  that  the  church  establishment  was 
disproportioned  to  the  wants  or  wishes  of  the  country. 

The  noble  lord  had  announced  to  the  House  that  he  meant 
to  reduce  a  certain  number  of  bishops  ;  but  that  reduction  did 
not  embrace  any  lessening  of  the  amount  to  be  paid  to  the 
establishment.  What  could  be  more  ridiculous  than  ofl'ering 
that  as  a  boon  which  in  no  way  lessened  taxation  ?  The  far- 
mer, under  the  measure,  would  not  have  to  pay  less  of  tithes. 


SPEECH  ON  THE  IRISH   COERCION  BILL.  175 

nor  would  tlie  peasant  have  to  paj  a  less  contribution  of  his 
potatoes.  Some  few  nights  since,  the  right  honorable  Secre- 
tary for  Ireland,  had  expressed  himself  in  terms  of  kindness 
towards  the  Irish,  and  without  scnitinizing  the  motives  of  the 
right  honorable  Secretary,  I  received  those  expressions  with 
gTateful  emotion.  I  advert  to  this  for  the  purpose  of  show- 
ing that  I  consider  the  present  measures,  not  as  the  acts  of 
the  right  honorable  Secretary,  but  as  those  of  the  government, 
and  upon  that  government  I  was  at  once  disposed  to  throw  the 
whole  responsibility.  "With  that  government  I  shall  at  once 
grapple,  and  though  I  may  be  laughed  at,  I  will  still  appeal 
to  the  House  of  Commons,  and  until  they  have  betrayed  them- 
selves, I  shall  never  beheve  that  they  will  consent  to  any  act 
which  would  annihilate  every  trace  of  public  freedom.  Would  '  » 
they  allow  such  a  measure  as  now  propounded  to  be  enacted  for 
England  or  for  Scotland  ?  Cei-tainly  not.  Why  then  tolerate 
it  for  Ireland  ?  This  was,  however,  a  matter  for  the  considera- 
tion of  the  House  of  Commons,  and  in  rising  iipon  this  occa- 
sion, my  object  is  more  to  elicit  the  opinions  of  others  than  to 
express  any  of  my  own.  The  Ii'ish  are  often  reproached  with  -  ■^■ 
acrimony,  and  perhaps  there  is  some  truth  in  the  observation,  r 
But  that  is  foreign  from  the  subject :  and  even  if  true,  the 
question  is,  is  there  any  ground  for  the  acrimony  ?  However, 
there  is  another  question ;  the  real  one  is,  whether  this 
House  is  pledged  to  adopt  coercive  measures  towards  Ire- 
land ?  True  it  is,  they  voted  for  the  Address,  but  they  were 
not  therefore  pledged  to  any  particular  line  of  coercive  mea- 
sures ;  and  I,  for  one,  can  never  believe,  untU  I  see  it,  that  a 
reformed  House  of  Commons  will,  by  supporting  a  govern- 
ment, vote  for  the  degi-adation  of  the  Irish  people. 

The  House  has  gone  a  great  way  in  supporting  ministers, 
but  they  will  halt  when  the  progress  of  government  is  toward 
despotism.  And  I  would  repeat  that  the  government  will  never 
be  supported  in  any  measures  that  will  tend  to  Irish  degrada- 
tion. The  Under  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  had,  in  some  cal- 
culation which  he  had  brought  before  the  House,  attempted 
to  show  that  the  connection  between  England  and  Ireland  was 
most  beneficial  to  the  latter,  and  he  flung  back  upon  me  the 
imputation  of  having  misrepresented  the  views  of  government. 


176  SELECT  SPEECHES  OP  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

Tlie  Under  Secretary  flung  back,  witli  apparent  indignation, 
my  cliarges  that  the  government  meant  to  supersede  the  Con- 
stitution and  suspend  the  Habeas  Corpus  Act.  Now,  I  ask 
the  House  whether  I  was  right  in  my  anticipations.  If  I  was 
right,  the  Under  Secretary  is  now  bound  to  come  forward  and 
support  me. 

Is  there  any  intention  of  suspending  the  Habeas  Corpus  Act? 
Is  there  any  intention  of  subverting  the  constitution  as  far  as 
regarded  Ireland?  Perhaps  there  is  not ;  if  so,  I  am  certainly 
in  error.  But  I  am  right.  I  call  upon  the  Under  Secretary, 
instead  of  pronouncing  me  a  calumniator,  to  come  forward 
and  support  me.  However  that  may  be,  I  will  state  this 
much  :  that  the  measure  which  I  understand  is  in  contempla- 
tion, is  bottomed  on  the  most  glaring  and  notorious  falsehoods. 
It  is  but  a  sample  of  the  many  acts  of  Whig  treachery  which 
have  been  practiced  towards  Ireland.  It  is  one  of  those  black 
and  gloomy  spots  which  indicate  Whig  ascendency.  That  fac- 
tion has  always  been  hostile  and  faithless  to  Ireland.  They 
were  in  power  when  Limerick  surrendered,  and  the  conduct  of 
the  brave  men  who  commanded  that  garrison  presented  a 
striking  contrast  to  that  of  the  Whigs.  On  that  occasion  a 
convention  was  signed,  and  immediately  afterwards  a  French 
armament  appeared  in  the  bay  and  proffered  assistance  to  the 
garrison ;  but  the  brave  and  gaUant  army,  who  had  once 
phghted  their  honor,  refused  their  assistance  and  stood  firm 
to  their  honor.  They  had  signed  the  treaty,  and  from  their 
signatures  they  would  not  depart.  Yet,  these  were  the  people 
upon  whom  the  Whigs  attempted  every  atrocity.  They  are  to 
be  subjected  to  martial  law  and  to  be  deprived  of  every  indem- 
nity in  case  of  false  accusation.  They  cannot  even  appear  at 
prayer  meetings,  and  in  case  of  any  charge  against  them,  they 
are  not  to  be  tried  in  their  own  counties,  but  the  venue  is  to  be 
changed. 

Mr.  C.  W.  Wynn  rose  to  order.  I  wish  to  know  whether  it 
is  competent  for  any  member  in  this  House  to  refer  to  proceed- 
ings elscAvhere;  whether,  in  point  of  fact,  those  proceedings 
might,  or  might  not,  come  under  their  notice. 

Mr.  O'Connell. — I  have  cautiously  abstained  from  alluding 
to  proceedings  in  another  place,  and  merely  supposed  that 


1 


SPEECH  ON  THE  IRISH   COERCION  BILL.  177 

sucli  proceedings  were  in  contemplation.  The  King's  minis- 
ters are  reported  and  believed  to  intend  to  introduce  into  the 
House  certain  measures. 

The  Speaker  said  there  could  be  no  doubt  that  what  the 
right  honorable  gentleman  said  was  strictly  in  accordance  with 
the  rules  of  the  House  ;  but  the  question  to  be  considered  was, 
did  it  apply  to  the  course  of  observation  pursued  by  the  hon- 
orable and  learned  member  ?  It  was  not  only  contrary  to  the 
rules  of  that  House  for  any  honorable  member  to  discuss  a 
measure  only  before  the  other  House  of  Parliament,  but  it 
would  be  extremely  inconvenient.  The  great  difficulty,  how- 
ever, the  Chair  felt  in  all  such  cases,  was,  to  know  whether 
the  honorable  gentleman  was  merely  alluding  to  matters  of 
notoriety  or  to  measures  generally,  or  by  him  attributed  to 
government,  or  whether  he  was  alluding  to  a  particular  mea- 
sure before  the  other  House  ?  He  was  quite  sure  that  what 
had  fallen  fi'om  the  right  honorable  gentleman  was  perfectly 
in  consonance  with  the  rules  of  the  House ;  and  he  was  also 
quite  sure  that  it  would  also  have  the  effect  of  putting  the 
honorable  and  learned  gentleman  on  his  guard,  and  prevent 
the  possibility  of  his  infringing  upon  those  wholesome  regu- 
lations. 

Mr.  O'Connell. — The  courtesy  and  distinctness  of  the  de- 
cision of  the  Chair  must  ensure  my  prompt  and  perfect  com- 
pliance. I  say,  then,  that  I  speak  not  of  what  has  occurred  in 
another  place.  But  my  course  of  conduct  is  this : — his  Ma- 
jesty's government  ask  the  House  of  Commons  to  confirm  a 
vote  of  supply  for  three  thousand  pounds  ;  and  I  take  this 
opportunity  to  call  the  attention  of  the  House  to  the  policy  of 
government.  Further,  I  attribute  to  that  government  certain 
schemes,  to  which  I  feel  it  necessary  to  call  attention,  as  in 
voting  supphes  the  House  sanctioned  the  conduct  of  govern- 
ment. One  of  the  schemes  with  which  I  charge  the  govern- 
ment is,  an  intention  to  change  the  venue. 

I  am  sorry  the  honorable  member  with  the  flourishing  consti- 
tuency, the  honorable  member  for  Leeds,  is  not  in  his  place, 
or  else  I  would  call  upon  him  to  describe  this  change  of 
venue.  The  honorable  member  had  alluded  to  the  subject,  and 
had  said  that  Ireland  indeed  would  have  had  a  grievance  had 


> 


178  SELECT  SPEECHES    OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

the  Catholics  of  the  south  been  subjected  to  a  change  of 
venue  as  the  Americans  were.  But  what  did  the  ministers 
now  intend  ?  Why,  to  send  the  Catholics  of  the  south  before 
what  the  honorable  member  for  Leeds  calls  the  prejudiced 
Orangemen  of  the  north  for  trial.  Oh  !  I  thank  the  honorable 
member  for  Leeds  for  his  allusion  to  what  was  one  of  the 
great  grievances  of  Massachusetts,  a  grievance  which  drove 
it  not  only  to  rebellion,  but  to  revolution,  for  be  it  remembered, 
the  struggle  with  the  parent  country  was  not  always  fatal  to  the 
resistant  ?  There  are  times  when  wrong  is  heaped  upon  wrong 
till  at  length  the  oppressed,  out  of  its  very  weakness,  becomes 
strong  and  achieves  a  victory  which  sanctifies  acts  that  had 
otherwise  been  rebellion.  But  what  was  one  of  the  grievances 
that  drove  the  Americans  to  revolt  ?  Why,  they  complained 
that  the  American  was  taken  from  his  OAvn  country  and  his 
own  tribunals,  to  be  tried  in  England.  To  take  a  Catholic 
from  Ireland  and  to  try  him  in  England,  before  an  English 
^1J^  juvj,  would  be,  judging  upon   analogy,  such  an  act   as  the 

^  Americans  were  justified  in  resisting,  and  as  the  high-minded 

reformers  of  England  would  never  sanction.  This  is  one  of 
the  measures  I  accuse  the  government  of  intending  to  intro- 
duce, and  I  call  upon  the  reformers  of  England  to  say  whether 
they  will  comply  with  and  give  their  voice  for  the  enforcement 
of  so  iniquitous  a  proceeding. 

The  grievance  the  Americans  complained  of  was  nothing  to 
that  with  which  L'eland  is  threatened.  The  Americans  were 
taken  from  their  own  country,  it  is  true,  but  they  were  tried 
by  juries  and  by  the  judges  of  the  land.  See  the  scheme  that 
was  proposed  for  Ireland.  It  was  to  be  in  the  Lord  Lieute- 
tenant  to  declare  any  district  in  a  state  of  disturbance  ;  it  was 
to  be  in  the  power  of  one  man  to  outlaw  Ireland  or  any  part 
of  it,  and  the  part  so  outlawed  was  to  be  subject  to  mihtary 
tribunals.  The  law  of  the  land  was  to  become  a  dead  letter 
at  the  dictum  of  a  single  man.  Habeas  Corpus  was  to  be  of  no 
effect,  and  even  the  ears  of  parhament  were  to  be  closed 
against  the  appeal  of  the  oppressed.  The  honorable  member 
for  Oldham,  whose  excellent  sense  had  enabled  him  to  mark 
out  a  safe  and  wholesome  course  of  proceeding,  has  complained 
of  the  use  of  professional  terms  and  phrases  unintelligible  to 


I 


SPEECH  ON  THE  IRISH  COERCION  BELL.  179 

the  general  listener.  The  complaint  is  just.  Therefore  in  this 
case  let  them  not  hear  any  more  about  the.  suspension  of 
Habeas  Corpus,  but  rather  let  them  hear  that  one  man  is  to 
have  the  power  of  imprisoning  whom  he  chooses  in  Ireland. 
Such  is  the  fact.  And  a  man  being  imprisoned,  by  whom  is 
he  to  be  tried  ?  By  the  judges  of  the  land  and  juries  ?  No 
such  thing.  But  by  five  military  officers,  who  have  each  held 
a  commission  two  years.  Yes,  there  was  another  provision, 
the  officers  must  be  above  twenty-one  years  of  age. 

[On  Mr.  Shiel  prompting  Mi".  O'Connell,  Mr.  Stanley  rose  to 
order.] 

Mr.  O'Connell. — The  right  honorable  gentleman  had  risen 
to  call  him  to  order,  and  instead  of  doing  so  had  forestalled 
him  by  a  reply.  Oh !  let  Ireland  at  least  be  heard ;  let  her 
have  fair  play.  If  Ireland  is  to  be  gagged,  let  it  not  at  least 
be  Avithout  a  hearing. 

The  Speaker  said  he  felt  himself  called  upon  to  interrupt 
the  honorable  and  learned  member.  Nothing  could  be  clearer 
than  that  it  was  disorderly  for  any  honorable  member  to  go 
into  the  details  of  a  measure  not  before  the  House,  but  before 
the  other  House  of  Parliament.  He  had  before  stated  that 
to  be  the  case,  and  he  had  done  so  the  rather  because  when 
before  called  upon  to  maintain  order,  the  honorable  and 
learned  member  had  not  arrived  at  the  point  he  now  noticed 
as  irregular,  although  there  might  be  reason  to  apprehend  he 
would  do  so.  The  honorable  and  learned  member  had  now 
gone  into  that  detail,  and  if  it  was  not  meant  as  having  refer- 
ence to  some  measure  before  the  other  House  of  Parhament, 
but  was  to  be  taken  as  a  mere  supposition,  he  left  to  the  hon- 
orable and  learned  member  to  say  how  much  it  would  assist 
his  argument. 

Mr.  O'Connell. — I  will  obey  the  injunction  of  the  chair.  I 
speak  upon  supposition.  I  attribute  to  the  government, 
whether  right  or  wrong — if  wrong  I  shall  be  contradicted — 
I  attribute  to  the  government,  nay,  to  the  noble  lord  (the 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer) — for  to  avoid  even  the  appear- 
ance of  personality,  I  will  not  mention  the  right  honorable 
secretary    (Mr.  Stanley) — I   attribute   to   the  noble  lord   an 


180  SELECT    SPEECHES  OP  DANIEL  O'CONXELL. 

intention  to  introduce  as  a  minister  to  the  Crown,  a  measure 
to  enable  five  military  officers  to  dispose  of  the  liberty,  if  not 
the  lives  of  such  of  his  Majesty's  subjects  in  Ireland  as  the 
Lord  Lieutenant  chooses  to  send  before  them.  Nay,  a  major- 
ity of  five  members  are  to  have  that  power.  I  am  not  sur- 
prised at  the  sentiments  of  the  right  honorable  secretary.  It 
is  but  natural  for  the  right  honorable  gentleman  to  shrink 
from  any  participation  in  so  monstrous,  so  horrible  a  scene. 
Never  was  a  plan  more  strongly  marked  with  despotic  boldness 
and  tyrannical  determination  than  this.  But  can  it  be  ?  Is 
it  possible  that  his  Majesty's  government  will  dare  to  propose 
to  a  British  House  of  Commons  to  give  to  thi-ee  military  offi- 
cers the  power  of  destroying  the  liberty  of  the  people  of  Ire- 
land ?  Is  that  a  plan  for  an  Enghsh  nobleman  to  originate, 
and  for  an  Enghsh  House  of  Commons  to  sanction  ?  But  is 
tliat  aU  ?     Oh,  no  ! 

The  Americans  complained  of  the  venue  being  changed 
from  America  to  England,  but  the  Americans  were  tried  by 
the  judges  of  the  land  and  by  juries.  Such  is  not  to  be  the 
case  with  my  countrymen.  No,  they  are  to  be  handed  over 
to  a  military  tribunal  of  three  officers.  And  what  is  the  char- 
acter of  this  tribunal  ?  I  admii'e  the  British  army.  A  braver 
never  went  into  the  field.  I  admire,  too,  the  character  of  the 
officers  in  private  life.  They  are  humane,  enKghtened,  kindly. 
But  what  are  the  military  tribunals  to  do  ?  How  may  they  not 
be  composed  ?  If  three  ensigns  or  three  lieutenants  formed  a 
majority  of  one  of  them,  would  they  venture  to  exercise  their 
judgments  in  opposition  to  the  wishes  of  government  ?  They 
dare  not.  If  they  did,  they  would  be  dismissed  the  service. 
The  tribimal  projected  was  open  to  every  influence  in  the  way 
of  patronage  and  interest  that  could  take  from  it  the  character 
of  impartiahty  or  justice  ;  and  it  is  to  such  a  tribunal  that  the 
King's  subjects  in  Ireland  are  to  be  delivered  over,  boimd, 
fettered,  and  gagged.  Nay,  more,  to  such  a  tribunal  is  to  be 
given  the  power  of  punishing  men  for  not  giving  e\'idence. 
Oh,  let  honorable  members  call  to  mind  the  scenes  under  a 
similar  but  not  so  atrocious  system.  I  remember  one  trial 
which  occurred  in  1798.  Upon  it  a  poor  wretch  named  Grady 
was  called  as  a  witness,  and  the  trial  took  place  in  Kerry.    By- 


SPEECH   ON  THE  lEISH  COERCION  BILL.  181 

tlie-by,  it  is  a  fact  wortlij  of  notice,  that  in  1798  there  tpas 
little  or  no  disturbance  in  the  great  CathoHc  counties.  In 
Galway  there  was  no  disturbance,  in  Kerry  but  one,  in  Cork 
and  in  other  Catholic  counties,  all  was  peace.  But  with  ]-espect 
to  Grady ;  he  was  called  before  one  of  these  tribunals  to  give 
evidence,  and  his  answer  not  being  satisfactory,  he  was  ordered 
out  and  to  receive  one  hundred  lashes.  He  received  them,  and  * 
was  again  brought  before  the  tribunal.  To  the  same  question 
he  made  the  same  answer,  and  he  was  ordered  to  receive  a 
second  one  hundred  lashes.  He  did  receive  them,  and  was 
brought  in  a  third  time.  The  same  question  was  repeated, 
and  a  third  time  he  gave  the  same  answer.  He  was  ordered 
out  to  receive  a  third  one  hundred  lashes,  and  while  the  pun- 
ishment was  being  inflicted,  he  fainted  almost  to  death.  He 
was  not  brought  up  again.  Will  the  House  forget  that  such 
scenes  as  that  have  occuiTed  before  a  mihtary  tribunal  ?  Are 
we,  with  such  horrible  facts  on  record,  to  have  Court  Martial 
in  Ireland  ? 

It  will  not  be  necessary  before  a  Reformed  Parliament,  and 
in  the  nineteenth  century,  to  do  more  than  to  point  out  such 
atrocities  to  bring  on  their  universal  execration.  I  charge  the 
noble  lord  with  this — intending  to  introduce  a  bill  which  is 
to  be  a  selection  of  all  the  bitterest  parts  of  all  the  severest 
acts  ever  passed  for  the  coercion  of  Ireland.  I  would  ask  the 
noble  lord  this — Is  it  not  a  part  of  your  plan  to  render  the 
military  tribunals  irresponsible  to  the  law  ?  I  repeat — it  is  to 
the  British  Parliament  in  the  nineteenth  century  I  am  calling 
attention  to  such  monstrous  matters.  Will  this  parliament 
desert  Ireland  ?  Ireland  has  stood  by  England  in  the  great 
fight  for  reform,  and  should  not  England  now  stand  by  Ireland 
when  it  implores  and  demands  that  every  particle  of  the  life 
and  spirit  of  the  constitution  shall  not  be  destroyed  ? 

I  will  not  now  go  further  into  details.  It  must  be  unneces- 
sary for  me  to  do  so.  I  hay©  said  enough  to  excite  the  inter- 
est of  any  lover  of  Hberty  who  has  heard  me,  or  it  is  not  in  the 
power  of  language  to  do  so.  I  demand  for  my  country  that 
the  constitution  shaU  not  be  suppressed — that  the  constitution 
shall  not  be  frittered  away  by  unknown  private  witnesses. 
Before  Ireland  is  menaced  with  even  the  semblance  of  hberty, 


182  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DAXCEL  O'COKXELL. 

let  lier  at  least  be  heard,  let  lier  meet  her  accusers  face  to  face, 
and  in  the  light  of  day.  If  Ireland  is  to  be  deprived  of  the 
constitution,  and  of  her  liberties,  at  least  let  her  be  heard  in 
her  defence.  According  to  the  plan  of  the  ministers,  Ireland 
is  to  be  dumb ;  that  great  and  important  privilege,  the  right 
of  petition,  is  to  be  suppressed.  WiU  England  inflict  upon 
Ireland  so  iniquitous  a  wrong  ? 

[The  honorable  and  learned  member,  after  thanking  the  House 
for  the  patience  ^vith  which  thev  had  heard  him,  concluded  by  en- 
treating the  House,  by  an  expression  in  favor  of  an  inquiry,  before 
the  exaction  of  measures  of  severity,  to  entitle  themselves  to  the 
eternal  gratitude  of  the  Irish  people.] 


SPEECH  AT  ^ITLLAGH^LiST  MOXSTEE  I^EETEsG, 
SEPTE:^IBEE,  1843. 


I  ACCEPT,  with  the  greatest  alacrity,  the  high  honor  you  have 
done  me  in  calling  me  to  the  chair  of  this  majestic  meeting. 
I  feel  more  honored  than  I  ever  did  in  my  hfe,  with  one  sin- 
gle exception,  and  that  related  to,  if  possible,  an  equally  ma- 
jestic meeting  at  Tara.  But  I  must  say  that  if  a  comparison 
were  instituted  between  them,  it  would  take  a  more  discriminat- 
ing eye  than  mine  to  discover  any  difference  between  them. 
There  are  the  same  incalculable  numbers — there  is  the  same 
firmness — there  is  the  same  determination — there  is  the  same 
exhibition  of  love  to  old  Ireland — there  is  the  same  resolution 
not  to  violate  the  peace — ^not  to  be  guilty  of  the  sHghtest  out- 
rage— ^not  to  give  the  enemy  power  by  committing  a  crime, 
but  peacefully  and  manfully  to  stand  together  in  the  open  day 
— to  protest  before  man,  and  in  the  presence  of  God,  against 
the  iniquity  of  continuing  the  Union. 

At  Tara,  I  protested  against  the  Union — I  repeat  the  protest 
MuUaghmast.  I  declare  solemnly  my  thorough  conviction, 
as  a  constitutional  lawyer,  that  the  Union  is  totally  void  in 
point  of  principle  and  of  constitutional  force.  I  teU  you  that 
no  portion  of  the  empire  had  the  power  to  traffic  on  the  rights 


SPEECH  AT  MULLAGHMAST.  183 

and  liberties  of  the  Irish  people.  The  Irish  people  nominated 
them  to  make  laws,  and  not  legislatures.  Thev  were  ap- 
pointed to  act  under  the  constitution  and  not  annihilate  it 
Their  delegation  from  the  people  was  confined  within  the  limits 
of  the  constitution,  and  the  moment  the  Irish  parhament  went 
beyond  those  limits  and  destroyed  the  constitution,  that  mo- 
ment it  annihilated  its  own  power,  but  could  not  annihilate 
the  immortal  spirit  of  hberty,  which  belongs,  as  a  rightful  in- 
heritance, to  the  people  of  Ireland.  Take  it  then  from  me 
that  the  Union  is  void.  I  admit  there  is  the  force  of  a  law, 
because  it  has  been  supported  by  the  poUceman's  truncheon 
— by  the  soldier's  bayonet — and  by  the  horseman's  sword ;  be- 
cause it  is  supported  by  the  courts  of  law  and  those  who  have 
power  to  adjudicate  in  them ;  but  I  say  solemnly,  it  is  not  sup- 
ported by  constitutional  right.  The  Union,  therefore,  in  my 
thorough  conviction,  is  totally  void,  and  I  avaU  myself  of  this 
opportunity  to  announce  to  several  hundred  of  thousands  of  my 
fellow-subjects,  that  the  Union  is  an  unconstitutional  law,  and 
that  it  is  not  faved  to  last  long — its  hour  is  approaching. 
America  offered  us  her  sympathy  and  support.  "We  refused 
the  support  but  we  accepted  the  sympathy ;  and  while  we  ac- 
cepted the  sympathy  of  the  Americans  we  stood  upon  the  firm 
ground  of  the  right  of  every  human  being  to  hberty  ;  and  I,  in 
the  name  of  the  Irish  nation,  declare  that  no  support  ob- 
tained from  America  should  be  purchased  by  the  price  of 
abandoning  principle  for  one  moment,  and  that  principle  is, 
that  every  human  being  is  entitled  to  freedom. 

My  friends,  I  want  nothing  for  the  Irish  but  their  country, 
and  I  think  the  Irish  are  competent  to  obtain  their  own  coun- 
try for  themselves.  I  like  to  have  the  sympathy  of  every  good 
man  everywhere,  but  I  want  not  armed  support  or  physical 
strength  from  any  country.  The  Eepubhcan  party  lq  France 
offered  me  assistance.  I  thanked  them  for  theii^  sympathy, 
but  I  distinctly  refused  to  accept  any  support  from  them.  I 
want  support  from  neither  France  nor  America,  and  if  that 
usurper,  Louis  Philippe,  who  trampled  on  the  hberties  of  his 
own  gallant  nation,  thought  fit  to  assail  me  in  his  newspaper, 
I  returned  the  tavmt  with  double  vigor,  and  I  denounce  him  to 
Europe  and  the  world  as  a  treacherous  tyrant,  who  has  violated 


184  SELECT  SPEECHES    OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

the  compact  with  his  own  country,  and  therefore  is  not  fit  to 
assist  the  hberties  of  any  other  country.  I  want  not  the  sup- 
port of  France;  I  want  not  the  support  of  America;  I  have 
physical  support  enough  about  me  to  acliieve  any  change ; 
but  you  know  well  that  it  is  not  my  plan — I  will  not  risk  the 
safety  of  one  of  you.  I  could  not  afford  the  loss  of  one  of 
you — I  will  protect  you  all,  and  it  is  better  for  you  all  to  be 
merry  and  ahve,  to  enjoy  the  repeal  of  the  Union  ;  but  there 
is  not  a  man  of  you  there  that  would  not,  if  we  were  attacked 
unjustly  and  illegally,  bo  ready  to  stand  in  the  open  field  by 
my  side.  Let  every  man  that  concurs  in  that  sentiment  lift 
up  his  hand. 

[Every  individual  in  the  immense  multitude  hfted  his  hand 
amidst  tremendous  cheering.] 

The  assertion  of  that  sentiment  is  our  sure  protection,  for 
no  person  will  attack  us,  and  we  will  attack  nobody.  Indeed, 
it  would  be  the  height  of  absurdity  for  us  to  think  of  making 
any  attack  ;  for  there  is  not  one  man  in  his  senses  in  Em*ope 
or  America,  that  does  not  admit  that  the  re^ijeal  of  the  Union 
is  now  inevitable.  The  English  papers  taunted  us,  and  their 
writers  laughed  us  to  scorn ;  but  now  they  admit  that  it  is  im- 
possible to  resist  the  apphcation  for  repeal.  More  power  to 
you.  But  that  even  shows  we  have  power  enough  to  know 
how  to  use  it.  Why,  it  is  only  this  week  that  one  of  the  lead- 
ing London  newspapers,  called  the  Morning  Herald,  who  had 
a  reporter  at  the  Lismore  meeting,  pubhshed  an  account  of 
that  great  and  mighty  meeting,  and  in  that  account  the  writer 
expressly  says  that  it  wiU.  be  impossible  to  refuse  so  peacea- 
ble, so  determined,  so  unanimous  a  people,  as  the  people  of 
Ireland,  ihS  restoration  of  their  domestic  legislature.  For  my 
own  part,  I  would  have  thought  it  wholly  unnecessary  to  call 
together  so  large  a  meeting  as  this,  but  for  the  trick  played  by 
"Wellington,  and  Peel,  and  Graham,  and  Stanley,  and  the  rest 
of  the  paltry  administration,  by  whose  government  this  coun- 
try is  disgraced.  I  don't  suppose  so  worthless  an  administra- 
tion ever  before  got  together.  Lori  Stanley  is  a  renegade  from 
WTiiggism,  and  Sir  James  Graham  is  worse.  Sir  Eobert  Peel 
has  five  hundred  colors  on  his  bad  standard,  and  not  one  of 
them  is  permanent.     To-day  it  is  orange,  to-morrow  it  will 


SPEECH  AT  MULLAGHMAST.  185 

be  green,  the  day  after  neither  one  nor  the  other,  but  we  shall 
take  care  that  it  shall  never  be  dyed  in  blood. 

Then  there  is  the  poor  old  Duke  of  Wellington,  and  nothing 
was  ever  so  absurd  as  their  deification  of  him  in  England. 
The  EngUsh  historian — rather  the  Scotch  one — Alison,  an  ar- 
rant Tory,  admits  that  the  Duke  of  Wellington  was  surprised 
at  Waterloo,  and  if  he  got  victoriously  out  of  that  battle,  it 
was  owing  to  the  valor  of  the  British  troops,  and  their  uncon- 
querable determination  to  die,  but  not  to  yield.  No  man  was 
ever  a  good  soldier,  but  the  man  who  goes  into  the  battle  de- 
termined to  conquer  or  not  come  back  from  the  battle-field. 
No  other  principle  makes  a  good  soldier — conquer  or  die  is 
the  battle  cry  for  the  good  soldier ;  conquer  or  die  is  his  only 
security.  The  Duke  of  Wellington  had  troops  at  Waterloo 
that  had  learned  that  word,  and  there  were  Irish  troops 
amongst  them.  You  aU  remember  the  verses  made  by  the 
poor  Shan  Van  Yocht  : 

"  At  famed  Waterloo, 
Duke  Wellington  would  look  blue 
If  Paddy  was  not  there  too, 
Says  the  Shan  Van  Vocht." 

Yes,  the  glory  he  got  there  was  bought  by  the  blood  of  the 
Enghsh,  Irish,  and  Scotch  soldiers — the  glory  was  yom'S.  He 
is  nominally  a  member  of  the  administration,  but  yet  they 
would  not  entrust  him  with  any  kind  of  office.  He  has  no 
duty  at  all  to  perform,  but  a  sort  of  Irish  anti-repeal  warden. 
I  thought  I  never  would  be  obliged  to  the  ministry,  but  I  am 
obhged  to  them.  They  put  a  speech  abusing  the  Irish  into 
the  Queen's  mouth.  They  accused  us  of  disaftection,  but 
they  lie — it  is  their  speech — there  is  no  disaffection  in  Ireland. 
We  were  loyal  to  the  sovereigns  of  Great  Britain,  even  when 
they  were  our  enemies — we  Avere  loyal  to  George  the  Third, 
even  when  he  betrayed  us — we  were  loyal  to  George  the 
Fourth,  when  he  blubbered  and  cried  when  we  forced  him  to 
emancipate  us.  We  were  loyal  to  old  Billy,  though  his  min- 
ister put  into  his  mouth  a  base,  bloody,  and  intolerant  speech 
against  Ireland;  and  we  are  loyal  to  the  Queen,  no  matter 
what  our  enemies  may   say  to  the   contrary.     It  is   not   the 


186  SELECT    SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  o'CONNELL. 

Queen's  speech,  and  I  pronounce  it  to  be  a  lie.  There  is  no 
dissatisfaction  in  Ireland,  but  there  is  this — a  fuU  determina^ 
tion  to  obtain  justice  and  hberty.  I  am  much  obliged  to  the 
miiristry  for  that  speech,  for  it  gives  me,  amongst  other  things, 
an  opportunity  of  addressing  such  meetings  as  this.  I  had 
held  the  monster  meetings.  I  had  fuUy  demonstrated  the 
opinion  of  Ireland.  I  was  conyinced  their  unanimous  de- 
termination to  obtain  liberty  was  sufficiently  signified  by 
the  many  meetings  already  held ;  but  when  the  mimister's 
speech  came  out,  it  was  necessary  to  do  something  more. 
Accordingly,  I  called  a  monster  meeting  in  Loughrea.  I 
called  another  meeting  in  Clifden.  I  had  another  monster 
meeting  in  Lismore,  and  here  now  we  are  assembled  on  the 
Eath  of  Mullaghmast. 

At  Mullaghmast  (and  I  have  chosen  this  for  this  ob\aous 
reason),  we  are  on  the  precise  spot  where  English  treachery — 
aye,  and  false  Irish  treachery,  too — consummated  a  massacre 
that  has  never  been  imitated,  save  in  the  massacre  of  the 
Mamelukes  by  Mahomet  Ali.  It  was  necessary  to  have  Turks 
atrocious  enough  to  commit  a  crime  equal  to  that  perpetrated 
by  Enghshmen.  But  do  not  think  that  the  massacre  at  Mul- 
laghmast was  a  question  between  Protestants  and  Catholics — 
it  was  no  such  thing.  The  murdered  persons  were  to  be  sure 
Cathohcs,  but  a  great  number  of  the  murderers  were  also 
CathoHcs,  and  Irishmen,  because  there  were  then,  as  well  as 
now,  many  Cathohcs  who  were  traitors  to  Ireland.  But  we 
have  now  this  advantage,  that  we  have  many  honest  Protest- 
ants joining  us — ^joining  us  heartUy  in  hand  and  heart,  for  old 
Ireland  and  liberty.  I  thought  this  a  fit  and  becoming  spot 
to  celebrate,  in  the  open  day,  our  unanimity  in  declaring  our 
determination  not  to  be  misled  by  any  treachery.  Oh,  my 
friends,  I  will  keep  you  clear  of  all  treachery — there  shall  be 
no  bargain,  no  compromise  with  England — we  shall  take 
nothing  but  repeal,  and  a  parhament  in  College  Green.  You 
wiU  never,  by  my  advice,  confide  in  any  false  hopes  they  hold 
out  to  you ;  never  confide  in  anything  coming  from  them,  or 
cease  from  your  struggle,  no  matter  what  promise  may  be 
held  out  to  you,  until  you  hear  me  say  I  am  satisfied ;  and  I 
wiU  teU  you  where  I  will  say  that — near  the  statue  of  King 


SPEECH  AT  MUIiLAGHMAST.  187 

William,  in  College  Green.  No,  we  came  liere  to  express  our 
determination  to  die  to  a  man,  if  necessary,  in  the  cause  of  old 
Ireland.  We  came  to  take  advice  of  each  other,  and  above 
all,  I  beheve  you  came  here  to  take  my  advice.  I  can  tell 
you,  I  have  the  game  in  my  hand — I  have  the  triumph  secure 
— I  have  the  repeal  certain,  if  you  but  obey  my  advice. 

[Great  cheers,  and  cries  of  "  We  will  obey  you  in  any- 
thmg."] 

I  wiU  go  slow — you  must  allow  me  to  do  so — but  you  will  go 
sure.  No  man  shall  find  himself  imprisoned  or  persecuted 
who  follows  my  advice.  I  have  led  you  thus  far  in  safety ; 
I  have  swelled  the  multitude  of  repealers  until  they  are  identi- 
fied with  the  entire  population,  or  nearly  the  entire  population 
of  the  land,  for  seven  eighths  of  the  Irish  people  are  now  en- 
rolling themselves  repealers.  [Cheers  and  cries  of  more  power 
to  you.]  I  don't  want  more  power ;  I  have  power  enough,  and 
all  I  ask  of  you  is  to  allow  me  to  use  it.  I  wiU  go  on  quietly 
and  slowly,  but  I  will  go  on  firmly,  and  with  a  certainty  of 
success.  I  am  now  arranging  a  plan  for  the  formation  of  the 
Irish  House  of  Commons. 

It  is  a  theory,  but  it  is  a  theory  that  may  be  realized  in 
three  weeks.  The  repeal  arbitrators  are  beginning  to  act — 
the  people  are  submitting  their  differences  to  men  chosen  by 
themselves.  You  will  see  by  the  newspapers  that  Dr.  Gray, 
and  my  son,  and  other  gentlemen,  have  aheady  held  a  petty 
session  of  their  own,  where  justice  will  be  administered  free 
of  all  expense  to  the  people.  The  people  shall  have  chosen 
magistrates  of  their  own  in  the  room  of  the  magistrates  who 
have  been  removed.  The  people  shall  submit  their  differences 
to  them,  and  shall  have  strict  justice  administered  to  them, 
that  shall  not  cost  them  a  single  farthing.  I  shall  go  on  with 
that  plan  until  we  have  aU  disputes  settled  and  decided  by 
justices  appointed  by  the  people  themselves.  [Long  may  you 
live.]  I  wish  to  Kve  long  enough  to  have  perfect  justice  ad- 
ministered to  Ireland,  and  hberty  proclaimed  throughout  the 
land.  It  will  take  me  some  time  to  prepare  my  plan  for  the 
formation  of  the  new  Irish  House  of  Commons — that  plan 
which  we  will  yet  submit  to  her  Majesty  for  her  approval, 
when  she  gets  rid  of  her  present  paltry  administration  and 


188  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL   O'CONNELL. 

lias  one  tliat  I  can  support.  But  I  must  finisli  that  job  be- 
fore I  go  forth,  and  one  of  my  reasons  for  caUing  you  together 
is  to  state  my  intentions  to  you.  Before  I  arrange  my  plan 
the  Conciliation  Hall  will  be  finished,  and  it  will  be  worth  any 
man's  while  to  go  from  MuUaghmast  to  Dublin  to  see  it. 

When  we  have  it  arranged  I  will  call  together  three  hundred, 
as  the  Times  called  them,  bogtrotters,  but  better  men  never 
stepped  on  pavement.     But  I  will  have  the  tliree  hundred  and 
no  thanks  to  them.     Wales  is  up  at  present,  almost  in  a  state 
of  insurrection.     The  people  there  have  found  that  the  land- 
lords' power  is  too  great,  and  has  been  used  tyranically,  and  I 
believe  you  agree  with  them  tolerably  well  in  that.     They  in- 
sist on  the  sacredness  of  the  right  of  the  tenants  to  security  of 
possession,  and  with  the  equity  of  tenure  which  I  would  es- 
tablish, we  will  do  the  landlords  full  justice,  but  we  will  do 
the  people  justice  also.     We  will  recollect  that  the  land  is  the 
landlord's,  and  let  him  have  the  benefit  of  it,  but  we  will  also 
recollect  that  the  labor  belongs  to  the  tenant,  and  the  tenant 
must  have  the  value  of  his  labor,  not  transitory  and  by  the 
day,  but  permanently  and  by  the  year.     Yes,  my  friends,  for 
this  purpose  I  must  get  some  time.     I  worked  the  present  re- 
peal year  tolerably  well.     I  beUeve  no  one  in  January  last, 
would  believe  that  we  could  have  such  a  meeting  within  the 
year  as  the  Tara  demonstration.     You  may  be  sure  of  this — 
and  I  say  it  in  the  presence  of  him  who  will  judge  me — that 
I  never  will  willfully  deceive  you.     I  have  but  one  wish  under 
heaven,  and  that  is  for  the  Uberty  and  prosperity  of  Ireland. 
I  am  for  leaving  England  to  the  English,  Scotland  to  the 
Scotch,  but  we  must  have  Ireland  for  the  Irish.     I  will  not  be 
content  until  I  see  not  a  single  man  in  any  office,  from  the 
lowest  constable  to  the  Lord  Chancellor,  but  Irishmen.   This  is 
our  land,  and  we  must  have  it.     We  will  be  obedient  to  the 
Queen,  joined  to  England  by  the  golden  link  of  the  Crown, 
but  we  must  have  our  own  parhament,  our  own  bench,  our 
own  magistrates,  and  we  will  give  some  of  the  shoneens  whc 
now  occupy  the  bench  leave  to  retire,  such  as  those  lately  ap- 
pointed by  Sugden.     He  is  a  pretty  boy,  sent  here  from  Eng- 
land ;  but  I  ask,  did  you  ever  hear  such  a  name  as  he  has  got  ? 
I  remember,  in  Wexford,  a  man  told  me  he  had  a  pig  at  home 


SPEECH  AT  MULLAGHMAST.  189 

wliicli  lie  was  so  fond  of  that  lie  would  call  it  Sugden.  No ; 
we  sliaU  get  judicial  independence  for  Ireland.  It  is  for  this 
purpose  we  are  assembled  here  to-day,  as  every  countenance 
I  see  around  me  testifies.  If  there  is  any  one  here  who  is  for 
the  Union,  let  him  say  so.  Is  there  anybody  here  for  the 
repeal.     [Cries  of  "  all,  all,"  and  loud  cheering.] 

Yes,  my  friends,  the  Union  was  begot  in  iniquity — it  was 
perpetrated  in  fraud  and  cruelty.  It  was  no  compact,  no  bar- 
gain, but  it  was  an  act  of  the  most  decided  tyranny  and  cor- 
ruption that  was  ever  yet  perpetrated.  Trial  by  jury  was  sus- 
pended— the  right  of  personal  protection  was  at  an  end — 
courts  martial  sat  throughout  the  land — and  the  county  of 
Kildare,  among  others,  flowed  with  blood.  Oh,  my  friends, 
Hsten  now  to  the  man  of  peace,  who  will  never  expose  you  to 
the  power  of  your  enemies.  In  1798  there  were  some  brave 
men,  some  valiant  men,  to  head  the  people  at  large,  but  there 
were  many  traitors,  who  left  the  people  in  the  power  of  their 
enemies.  The  Curragh  of  Kildare  afforded  an  instance  of 
the  fate  which  Irishmen  were  to  expect,  who  confided  in  their 
Saxon  enemies.  Oh,  it  was  an  iU-organized,  a  premature,  a 
foolish,  and  an  absurd  insurrection ;  but  you  have  a  leader  now 
who  never  wiU  allow  you  to  commit  any  act  so  foolish  or  so 
destructive.  How  delighted  do  I  feel  with  the  thorough  con- 
viction which  has  come  over  the  minds  of  the  people,  that  they 
could  not  gratify  your  enemies  more  than  by  committing  a 
crime.  No  ;  our  ancestors  sufi'ered  for  confiding  in  the  Eng- 
lish, but  we  never  wiU  confide  in  them.  They  suffered  for 
being  divided  amongst  themselves.  There  is  no  division 
amongst  us.  They  suffered  for  their  own  dissensions — for 
not  standing  man  to  man  by  each  other's  side.  We  shall 
stand  peaceably  side  by  side  in  the  face  of  every  enemy.  Oh, 
how  delighted  was  I  in  the  scenes  which  I  witnessed  as  I 
came  along  here  to-day !  How  my  heart  throbbed,  how  my 
spirit  was  elevated,  how  my  bosom  swelled  with  delight  at  the 
multitude  which  I  beheld,  and  which  I  shall  behold,  of  the 
stalwart  and  strong  men  of  KUdare !  I  was  dehghted  at  the 
activity  and  force  that  I  saw  around  me,  and  my  old  heart 
grew  warm  again  in  admiring  the  beauty  of  the  dark-eyed 
maids  and  matrons  of  Kildare.    Oh,  there  is  a  starlight  spark- 


190  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL    O'CONNELL. 

ling  from  the  eye  of  a  Ealdare  beauty,  that  is  scarcely  equalled, 
and  could  not  be  excelled  all  over  the  world.  And  remember 
that  you  are  the  sons,  the  fathers,  the  brothers,  and  the  hus- 
bands of  such  women,  and  a  traitor  or  a  coward  could  never 
be  connected  with  any  of  them.  Yes,  I  am  in  a  county,  re- 
markable in  the  history  of  Ireland  for  its  bravery  and  its  mis- 
fortune, for  its  creduhty  in  the  faith  of  others,  for  its  people 
judged  of  the  Saxon  by  the  honesty  and  honor  of  then'  own 
natures.  I  am  in  a  county  celebrated  for  the  sacredness  of 
its  shrines  and  fanes.  I  am  in  a  county  where  the  lamp  of 
Kildare's  holy  shrine  burned  with  its  sacred  fire,  through  ages 
of  darkness  and  storm — that  fire  which  for  six  centuries  burned 
before  the  high  altar  without  being  extinguished,  being  fed 
contiauously,  without  the  sHghtest  interruption,  and  it  seemed 
to  me  to  have  been  not  an  inapt  representation  of  the  continu- 
ous fideUty  and  rehgious  love  of  country  of  the  men  of  Kil- 
dare.  Yes,  you  have  those  high  quaHties — ^religious  fidelity, 
contiauous  love  of  country.  Even  your  enemies  admit  that 
the  world  has  never  produced  any  people  that  exceeded  the 
Irish  in  activity  and  strength.  The  Scottish  philosopher  has 
declared,  and  the  French  philosopher  has  confirmed  it,  that 
number  one  in  the  human  race  is,  blessed  be  Heaven,  the 
Irishman.  In  moral  virtue,  in  rehgion,  in  perseverance,  and 
in  glorious  temperance,  you  excel.  Have  I  any  teetotallers 
here  ?  Yes,  it  is  teetotaUsm  that  is  repealing  the  Union.  I 
could  not  afford  to  bring  you  together,  I  would  not  dare  to 
bring  you  together,  but  that  I  had  the  teetotallers  for  my 
pohce. 

Yes,  among  the  nations  of  the  earth,  Ireland  stands  number 
one  in  the  physical  strength  of  her  sons,  and  in  the  beauty 
and  purity  of  her  daughters.  Ireland,  land  of  my  forefathers, 
how  my  mind  expands,  and  my  sphit  walks  abroad  in  some- 
thing of  majesty,  when  I  contemplate  the  high  qualities,  ines- 
timable virtues,  the  true  purity  and  piety,  and  religious  fidelity 
of  the  inhabitants  of  your  green  fields  and  productive  moun- 
tains. Oh,  what  a  scene  surrounds  us ! — It  is  not  only  the 
countless  thousands  of  brave  and  active  and  peaceable  and 
rehgious  men  that  are  here  assembled,  but  nature  herself  has 
written  her  character  with  the  finest  beauty  in  the  verdant 


SPEECH  AT  MULLAGHMAST.  191 

plains  that  surround  us.  Let  any  man  run  round  the  horizon 
with  his  eye,  and  tell  me  if  created  natm-e  ever  produced  any- 
thing so  green  and  so  lovely,  so  undulating,  so  teeming  with 
production.  The  richest  harvests  that  any  land  can  produce 
are  those  reaped  in  Ireland ;  and  then  here  are  the  sweetest 
meadows,  the  greenest  fields,  the  loftiest  mountains,  the  purest 
streams,  the  noblest  rivers,  the  most  capacious  harbors — and 
her  water  power  is  equal  to  turn  the  machinery  of  the  whole 
world.  Oh,  my  friends,  it  is  a  country  worth  fighting  for — it 
is  a  country  worth  dying  for ;  but  above  all,  it  is  a  country 
worth  being  tranquil,  determined,  submissive  and  docile ;  for 
disciplined  as  you  are  in  obedience  to  those  who  are  breaking 
the  way,  and  trampling  down  the  barriers  between  you  and 
your  constitutional  liberty,  I  will  see  every  man  of  you  hav- 
ing a  vote,  and  every  man  protected  by  the  ballot  from  the 
agent  or  landlord.  I  will  see  labor  protected,  and  every  title 
to  possession  recognized,  when  you  are  industrious  and  hon- 
est. I  will  see  prosperity  again  throughout  your  land — the 
busy  hum  of  the  shuttle  and  the  tinkhng  of  the  smitliy  shall 
be  heard  again.  We  shall  see  the  nailer  employed  even  until 
the  middle  of  the  night,  and  the  carpenter  covering  himself  with 
his  chips.  I  will  see  prosperity  in  all  its  gradations  spreading 
through  a  happy,  contented,  rehgious  land.  I  will  hear  the 
hymn  of  a  happy  people  go  forth  at  sunrise  to  God  in  praise 
of  his  mercies — and  I  will  see  the  evening  sun  set  down 
amongst  the  uphfted  hands  of  a  rehgious  and  free  population. 
Every  blessing  that  man  can  bestow  and  religion  can  confer 
upon  the  faithful  heart,  shall  spread  throughout  the  land. 
Stand  by  me — join  with  me — I  will  say  be  obedient  to  me, 
and  Ireland  shall  be  free. 


192  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 


MR.  O'CONNELL'S  SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE, 

At  the  Irish  State  Trials,  1844,  in  the  Court  of  Queen's  Bench, 
in  Ireland,  in  the  case  of  the  Queen  vs.  Daniel  0'  Connell  and 
others. 


GENTLEifEN,  I  beg  your  patient  attention,  wliile  I  show  you, 
in  as  few  sentences  as  I  possibly  can,  and  in  my  own  plain  and 
prosiac  style,  the  right  I  have  to  demand  from  you  a  favorable 
verdict.  I  ask  it  without  disrespect  and  without  flattery — I 
ask  it  on  the  ground  of  common  sense  and  common  justice — 
upon  these  grounds  I  demand  your  favorable  verdict,  being 
thoroughly  convinced  that  I  am  plainly  entitled  to  it.  I  do 
not  feel  that  I  should  have  been  warranted  in  addressing  you 
at  all,  after  the  many  speeches  you  have  akeady  heard,  and 
that  powerful  display  of  talent  that  so  dehghted,  as  well  as  I 
trust  instructed  you ;  but  I  do  not  stand  here  my  own  client. 
I  have  clients  of  infinitely  more  importance.  My  chents,  in 
this  case,  are  the  Irish  people — my  client  is  Ireland — and  I 
stand  here  the  advocate  of  the  rights,  and  hberties,  and  con- 
stitutional privileges  of  that  people.  My  only  anxiety  is  lest 
their  sacred  cause — their  right  to  independent  legislation — 
should  be  in  the  slightest  degree  tarnished  or  impeded  by 
anything  in  which  I  have  been  the  instrument.  I  am  con- 
scious of  the  integrity  of  my  purpose — I  am  conscious  of  the 
purity  of  my  motives — I  am  conscious  of  the  inestimable  value 
of  the  object  I  had  in  view — the  Eepeal  of  the  Union.  I 
own  to  you  I  cannot  endure  the  Union  ;  it  was  founded  upon 
the  grossest  injustice — it  was  based  upon  the  grossest  insult — 
the  intolerance  of  Irish  prosperity.  This  was  the  motive  that 
actuated  the  malefactors  who  perpetrated  that  iniquity  ;  and 
I  have  the  highest  authority — the  ornament  for  many  years 
of  that  bench,  but  now  and  recently  in  his  honorable  grave — 
that  the  motive  of  this  proceeding  was  an  intolerance  of  Irish 
prosperity.  Nor  shall  I  leave  that  on  his  word  alone.  I 
have  other  authorities  for  it,  with  which  I  shall  trouble  you 
in  the  course  of  as  brief,  for  I  am  exceedingly  anxious  to  make 
as  brief  an  address  as  I  possibly  can.     I  am  not  here  to  deny 


SPEECH  IN  HIS   OWN  DEFENCE.  193 

anything  I  have  done,,  or  here  to  palliate  anything  that  I  have 
done.  I  am  ready  to  reassert  in  court  all  I  have  said,  not 
taking  upon  myseK  the  clumsy  mistakes  of  reporters — not 
abiding  by  the  faUibility  that  necessarily  attends  the  report- 
ing of  speeches,  and,  in  particular,  where  those  speeches  are 
squeezed  up  together,  as  it  were,  for  the  purposes  of  the  news- 
papers. I  do  not  hesitate  to  say  that  there  are  many  severe 
and  harsh  things  of  individuals,  and  clumsy  jokes,  that  I  would 
rather  not  have  said,  but  the  substance  of  what  I  have  said  I 
avow,  and  I  am  here  respectfully  to  vindicate  it ;  and  as  to  all 
my  actions,  I  am  ready,  not  only  to  avow  them,  but  to  justify 
them.  For  the  entke  of  what  I  have  done  and  said  was  done 
and  said  in  the  performance  of,  to  me,  a  sacred  duty — the  en- 
deavoring to  procure  the  restoration  of  the  Irish  parliament. 
If  I  had  no  other  objection  to  it  I  would  find  one  in  the  period 
in  which  it  was  carried — it  was  a  revolutionary  period.  The 
nations  of  Europe  were  overwhelmed  by  a  military  power,  in- 
spired as  it  was  by  the  infidel  philosophy  of  France.  At  that 
period,  almost  every  country  in  Europe  was  torn  from  its  legiti- 
mate sovereignty — ^people  were  crushed — princes  were  banished 
— ^kingdoms  and  states  were  altered — it  was  a  revokitionary 
period ;  but  alas !  a  day  of  retribution  and  restoration  has 
come  for  every  other  country  but  this.  What  has  since  hap- 
pened has  fortunately  restored  the  natural,  or,  at  least,  the 
political  order  of  things  in  other  countries — every  country  has 
its  day  of  retribution  and  restoration,  save  only  Ireland.  Ire- 
land alone  remains  under  the  influence  of  the  fatal  revolution 
of  that  period,  and  you  are  assembled  in  that  box  to  prevent 
justice  being  done  to  Ireland,  as  it  has  been  to  other  coun- 
tries. 

This  is  not  the  time  to  discuss  how  you  were  put  into  that 
box — nor  is  this  the  place  to  get  any  remedy  on  that  subject. 
I  do  not  assert  the  Attorney-General  had  anything  to  do  with 
that  matter  but  what  the  law  allowed  him  to  do,  and  over 
which  the  com't  had  no  control.  If  wrong  had  been  done,  the 
remedy  lay  elsewhere  ;  when,  if  right  was  violated,  it  will  be 
redressed — but  here  I  am  put  to  address  you,  without  either 
discourtesy  or  flattery,  as  to  the  species  of  tribunal  I  am  about 
to  offer  my  arguments.     It  is  quite  certain  there  is  considera- 


194:  SELECT  SPEECHES  OP  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

ble  discrepancy  of  opinion  between  you  and  me  ;  tliere  can  be 
no  doubt  of  that — there  is  a  discrepancy  on  one  subject,  and 
one  of  the  utmost  importance — we  differ  as  to  the  Repeal  of 
the  Union.  If  you  had  not  so  differed,  you  would  not  be  in  that 
very  box.  You  also  differ  with  me  on  another  most  important 
subject — and  that  is  on  the  subject  of  our  religious  belief.  If  you 
had  been  of  the  same  faith  as  I,  not  one  of  you  would  be  in 
that  box  ;  and  these  differences  are  perhaps  aggravated  by  the 
fact,  that  I  am  not  only  a  Cathohc,  but  one  who  was  most  suc- 
cessful— and  I  can  say  it  without  boasting,  for  it  is  a  part  of 
history — in  putting  down  that  Protestant  ascendency  of  which, 
perhaps,  you  are  the  champions — certainly  you  were  not  the 
antagonists,  and  in  estabhshing  that  religious  equality  against 
which  some  of  you  contended,  and  against  which  all  of  your 
opinions  were  formed.  This  is  a  disadvantage  which  does  not 
terrify  me  from  the  performance  of  my  duty.  I  care  not  what 
may  be  the  effect  as  regards  myself — I  care  not  what  punish- 
ment it  may  bring  down — I  glory  in  what  I  have  done — I 
boast  of  what  I  did.  I  am  ready  to  defend  aU  I  have  suc- 
ceeded in  accomphshing.  I  know  I  am,  gentlemen  of  the  jury, 
in  your  power,  but  I  know  I  am  in  the  power  of  jurors  of 
honesty  and  integrity,  and  I  appeal  to  you  as  such.  There 
are  points  on  which  we  essentially  differ.  The  first  is  the 
Repeal  of  the  Union — and  you  are  all  aware  of  my  former 
conduct  respecting  Cathohc  Emancipation.  But  you  are  there 
to  administer  justice — you  are  there  to  do  what  is  right  be- 
tween all  parties ;  and  while  I  remark  these  things,  it  is  not 
because  I  despair  of  your  doing  me  justice.  I  would,  how- 
ever, prefer  not  being  harassed  with  the  thought  that  by  any 
possibility,  either  by  the  infirmity  of  human  nature,  or  from 
any  cause,  other  ingredients  should  enter  in. 

Gentlemen,  I  now  have  done  with  you.  I  pass  on  to  the 
consideration  of  the  case  itself.  I  come  to  the  prosecution. 
It  is  a  curious  prosecution — it  is  a  strange  prosecution — it  is 
the  strangest  prosecution  that  was  ever  instituted.  It  is  not 
one  fact,  or  two  facts,  or  three  facts.  No ;  while  that  for 
which  our  criminal  law  is  most  lauded  is  the  simplicity  with 
which  a  particular  fact  is  tried,  so  that  the  jury  may  be  dis- 
embarrassed from  everything  else — here   it  is  the  history  of 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  195 

nine  montlis  you  are  to  go  tbrougli — here  you  liave  a  mon- 
strous accumulation  of  matter  flung  before  you ;  and  I  defy 
the  most  brilliant  understanding  that  ever  ornamented  a  court 
or  jury  to  disengage  what  may  be  of  importance  from  that 
which  may  induce  an  unfavorable  result,  but  which  ought  not, 
legally,  to  do  so.  The  great  difficulty  is,  to  bring  such  a  quan- 
tity of  matter  before  you.  In  doing  so  your  memory  fails ; 
and  it  is  worse  than  a  failure,  as  it  is  apt  to  recollect  what 
may  be  but  strong  and  striking,  while  it  may  forget  that  which 
should  make  an  important  consideration — those  parts  which 
are  explanatory  and  mitigatory. 

I  arraign  this  prosecution,  not  in  the  spirit  of  hostility  or 
anger,  but  on  constitutional  principles — the  impossibility  of 
any  jury  so  disengaging  that  mighty  mass  of  matter  now  be- 
fore it  as  to  find  out  what  was  really  the  question  to  deter- 
mine. Let  me  now  see  whether  I  can  help  you  in  that.  I 
will  endeavor  to  see  how  much  of  the  affirmative  there  is  in 
this  prosecution,  and  how  much  there  is  of  negative  qual- 
ity in  it — that  is,  what  it  is,  and  what  it  is  not.  The  entire 
strength  of  this  prosecution  consists  in  that  cabalistic  word, 
"  conspiracy."  If  I  look  to  any  dictionary  for  its  import,  or 
if  I  ask  common  sense,  I  find  it  means  a  secret  agreement 
among  several  persons  to  commit  a  crime.  That  is  the  com- 
mon sense  view  of  it,  as  well  as  its  dictionary  meaning — a  pri- 
vate agreement  among  several  persons  to  commit  a  crime  ;  but 
this  word,  in  recent  times,  has  been  taken  under  the  special 
protection  of  the  bar.  They  have  not  only  considered  it  an  of- 
fence to  conspire  to  commit  a  crime,  but  they  have  put  two 
hooks  into  a  Hue — so  to  divide  the  subject  as  both  committal 
of  crime  that  they  speU  out  conspiracy  in  such  a  way  as  to 
attain  that  end.  I  do  not  think  there  is  much  of  justice  in 
the  second  branch,  if  at  all  brought  into  consideration,  unless 
it  was  so  clear  and  so  distinct  as  to  substantiate  the  offence. 

We  will  now  take  this  conspiracy  ;  let  us  see  whether  there 
are  any  negative  qualities  in  it  as  to  the  evidence  produced  by 
the  Crown.  It  is  admitted  by  the  Crown  itself  in  this  case, 
that  there  was  no  privacy — no  secrecy — no  definite  agreement 
whatever  to  bring  it  about — but,  above  all,  there  was  no  pri- 
vate agreement,  no  secret  society,  nothing  concealed,  nothing 


196  SELECT  SPEECHES    OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

even  privately  communicated — tliere  was  no  private  informa- 
tion ;  nay,  not  one  private  conversation — every  thing  was 
open,  avowed,  proclaimed,  published.  A  secret  conspiracy  ? 
which  there  was  no  secrecy  about ! — all  lay  openly  pro- 
claimed, and  openly  published — whether  in  the  Dublin  Even- 
ing Mail,  or  Dublin  Evening  Post,  for  all  has  been  raked  out 
of  that  secret  abyss  of  all  secret  channels  of  communication, 
the  pubhc  newspapers.  Eeally,  it  is  quite  too  harsh  a  thing 
for  one  to  be  called  on  to  defend  himself  against  a  conspiracy 
so  perpetrated,  committed  in  open  day,  and  committed  by 
public  announcement,  with  the  ringing  of  bells,  to  know  who 
would  come  as  witnesses  to  the  conspiracy.  To  be  a  conspiracy 
there  must  be  an  agreement ;  but  whether  private  or  not,  that 
is  another  question,  but  I  insist  on  it  there  ought  to  be  some- 
thing to  conceal,  and  will  admit  that  it  should  not  be  in  the 
presence  of  the  legal  authorities,  nor  in  the  presence  of  her 
Majesty's  Attorney-General,  the  Sohcitor-General,  or  any  of 
the  learned  sergeants.  Eeally,  see  what  a  monstrous  thing 
it  is  to  call  that  a  conspiracy  which  everybody  in  the  world 
might  know,  and  which  all  might  witness.  Some  persons  had 
formed  the  arrangements ;  it  was  occasionally  attended  by 
Mr.  Such-a-one  one  day,  and  by  Mr.  Such-a-one  another  day  ; 
on  the  third  day  Mr.  Barrett  was  there ;  Mr.  Duffy  once  or 
twice,  thus  speUing  out  the  affair  in  that  way.  In  common 
sense,  could  it  be  endured  that  such  should  be  denominated  a 
conspiracy.  A  conspiracy  !  Where  was  this  agreement  made 
— when  made — how  was  it  made  ?  Was  it  made  in  winter  or 
summer — in  spring  or  autumn  ?  When  was  it  attended — on  a 
Sunday  or  a  week  day  ?  Can  you  tell  me  the  hour  of  the  day, 
or  the  month,  or  the  day  of  the  month  ?  Can  you  tell  me  any 
one  of  the  three  quarters  of  the  nine  months  ?  Who  was  by, 
who  spoke,  who  made  the  arrangements,  who  moved  and  sec- 
onded the  resolutions  ? 

Gentlemen  of  the  jury,  I  appeal  to  your  common  sense — to 
your  reason.  Place  yourselves  for  one  moment  in  my  position, 
and  you  were  addressing  a  Catholic  jury  ;  look  for  one  mo- 
ment and  see — how  ? — with  what  ? — I  will  not  say  with  indig- 
nation— but  with  what  higher  feelings  of  conscious  integrity 
you  would  laugh  with  scorn  the  daring  to  find  you  guilty  of  a 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE  OF  HIMSELF.  197 

conspiracy,  under  such  circumstances.  You  have  not  in  this 
case  the  sHghtest  shadow  of  a  concoction  ;  you  have  not  one 
particle  of  that  which  should  belong  to  a  charge  of  this  sort. 
I  do  not  even  know,  from  this  proceeding,  whether  I  was  pre- 
sent at  this  conspiracy  or  agreement,  either  public  or  private. 
Ought  I  not,  then,  to  have  the  advantage  of  an  aliln  ?  If  you 
were  to  run  over  the  nine  months  of  this  conspiracy,  it  would 
be  a  kind  of  toss-up  to  know  whether  I  was  there  or  some- 
body else — to  know  who  was  there — and  to  find  out  whether 
this  agreement  was  in  writing,  or  whether  it  was  a  mere  parole 
agreement.  And  I  want  also  to  know  has  any  one  told  you  ? 
If  there  were  an  action  in  the  Nisi  Prius  Court,  and  you  were 
the  jury  in  the  box,  and  that  the  question  was  one  of  plain 
contract,  is  there  any  possibility  of  your  not  finding  a  verdict 
on  a  contract  which  was  given  in  evidence  ?  But  here  there 
is  nothing  of  the  sort.  I  remember  it  being  once  said  to  a 
judge  by  a  lawyer — "  O,  my  lord,  it  would  not  be  evidence  on 
a  ten  pound  promissory  note,  but  it  might  be  evidence  in  a 
criminal  case."  Your  lordship  might  have  heard  that  such  a 
thing  was  once  said,  but  I  wiU  only  say  to  you  that  it  would 
not  be  evidence,  as  to  the  £10  contract ;  they  should  get  the 
definition — if  right,  I  should  be  in  the  biU  of  particulars. 
Such  a  definition — an  agency  and  conspiracy — and  not  be  at 
last  in  the  bill  particulars.  I  do  not  mean  to  profit  by  the 
circumstance,  but  I  say  it  is  not  in  the  bill  of  particulars ; 
and  therefore  if  they  had  attempted  to  give  it  in  writing, 
without  giving  it  in  the  biU  of  particulars,  they  would  un- 
doubtedly have  shut  out  from  the  beginning  all  evidence. 
Shall  they  escape  your  honest  view  on  such  a  subject  as  that 
of  consciences,  and  if  there  had  been  a  conspiracy  it  would  be 
proved,  and  that  the  only  reason  why  it  is  not  in  all  its  de- 
tails, and  all  its  circumstances  is  because  it  did  not  exist. 
What  are  they  to  do  ?  The  Attorney-General,  forsooth,  leaves 
it  to  you ;  the  agreement  ought  to  be  in  reality  ;  it  is  an  im- 
aginary one,  and  you  are  to  vote  that  the  imagination  is  a 
reahty,  and  find  me  guilty  because  you  imagine. 

I  do  not  wish  to  speak  disparagingly  of  the  Attorney-Gene- 
ral— ^no  man  is  less  inclined  to  do  so  than  I  am — on  the  con- 
trary, my  lords,  I  admit  the  ingenuity  with  which  he  stated 


/ 


198  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

the  case.  I  admit  the  talent  he  displayed,  the  industry  he 
evinced  throughout.  He  was  eleven  hours  at  it,  eleven  mortal 
hours.  When  did  he  tell  you  of  the  conspiracy  ?  "  Oh !"  said 
he,  "  wait  awhile,  wait  till  I  come  to  the  close,  and  when  I  do 
come  to  the  end,  go  back  to  the  beginning,  and  find  out  the 
conspiracy ;"  and  allow  me  to  say,  that  if  any  gentleman  could 
have  found  out  the  conspiracy,  it  would  have  been  the  Attor- 
ney-General. Yes,  he  did  take  eleven  hours  in  throwing  out 
that  garbage  to  the  jury.  "  There,"  said  he,  "  is  the  Pilot,  the 
Nation.  Here  are  speeches  and  publications — now  find  out 
the  conspiracy.  The  case  is  good  enough  for  you  to  make  out 
the  conspiracy."  I  remember  a  case  on  the  Munster  circuit 
in  which  the  celebrated  Mr.  Egan  was  engaged  for  the 
defendant.  It  was  stated  by  Mr.  Hoare,  a  gentleman  of  dark 
appearance,  who  made  a  very  powerful  speech  on  the  merits 
of  the  case.  Mr.  Egan  said — "  Oh,  I  will  make  such  another — 
I  will."  At  once — "  Gentlemen  of  the  jury,"  he  commenced. 
Now,  he  was  sure  of  his  jury,  and  all  he  wanted  was  an  excuse 
for  them.  "  Gentlemen  of  the  jury,"  said  he,  "  surely  you  will 
not  be  led  away  by  the  dark  obhvion  of  a  brow."  One  of  the 
counsel  who  sat  near  him  said,  "  Why,  Egan,  that  is  non- 
sense." "  To  be  sure  it  is,"  was  the  reply,  "  but  it  will  do  for 
the  jury."  So  the  eleven  hours  are  good  enough  for  you.  Oh ! 
it  is  nonsense — it  is  criminal  nonsense — to  call  that  conspiracy 
which  takes  eleven  hours  in  the  development.  Hardy  was 
tried  for  constructive  high  treason.  At  the  anniversary  which 
always  took  place  in  celebration  of  the  integrity  of  the  jury, 
one  who  had  been  a  juryman  in  the  case  was  in  the  habit  of 
attending ;  when  his  health  was  drunk  he  always  made  the 
same  speech,  to  the  effect  that  he  was  not  accustomed  to  public 
speaking,  and  in  the  course  of  such  speech  he  would  say — 
"  Mr.  Chairman,  I  will  tell  you  why  I  acquitted  Mr.  Hardy. 
The  counsel  was  eleven  hours  stating  the  case  ;  there  were 
eight  or  nine  days  occupied  in  giving  evidence.  Now  I  know 
that  no  man  could  be  guilty  of  treason  when  the  case  could 
take  so  many  words  and  such  a  length  of  time  to  prove,  so  I 
made  up  my  mind  to  acquit." 

Now  what  necessity  could  there  be  for  the  Attorney-Gene- 
ral to  ransack  newspapers  to  make  out  a  case  of  conspiracy 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE   OF  HIMSELF.  199 

against  the  Crown  ?  If  the  case  were  a  good  one,  depend  on 
it  the  Attorney-General  has  talent  enough  to  tell  you  all  in 
one  hour  and  a  half  at  the  utmost.  Give  me  leave  to  say — 
and  by  what  I  am  about  to  state  I  mean  to  signify  no  disre- 
spect to  the  counsel  for  the  Crown — I  consider  myself,  although 
I  am  not  here  with  my  wig  and  gown,  a  barrister  still,  and  I 
have  a  fellow-feeling  for  the  profession  ;  but  give  me  leave  to 
say  that  the  Attorney-GeDeral  unquestionably  would,  could  he 
have  done  so,  have  shown  you  the  when,  the  how,  the  manner, 
he  would  have  pointed  out  all  the  particulars.  But  what  has 
he  shown  you  ?  Nothing ;  and  he  leaves  the  case  in  your 
hands,  thinking  that  it  is  quite  good  enough  for  you.  There 
is  no  privacy  or  secrecy  even  imputed.  You  have  nothing  to 
conjecture — there  is  nothing  supposed  to  have  happened  in 
private — nothing  at  all.  The  entu'e  is  before  you,  and,  there- 
fore as  you  know  all,  I  say  that  there  never  was  a  case  in 
which  the  Attorney-General  so  signally  failed  as  in  the 
present. 

You  may  remember  when  this  trial  was  about  to  commence  ; 
the  whole  country  was  full  of  rumors.  It  was  said  that  some- 
thing dark  and  atrocious  would  come  out — that  there  was  a 
clue  to  everything.  Why,  my  lords,  I  do  solemnly  assure  you 
that  no  less  than  seven  gentlemen  have  been  pointed  out  to 
me  after  this  mode — "  There  is  Mr.  So-and-so,  one  who  was 
seen  with  Mr.  Kemmis's  officer."  "  That  man  was  at  the  Cas- 
tle." "That  man  is  a  barrister,  whose  office  is  not  far  distant 
from  yours  in  Merrion  Square."  "Don't,"  it  was  said,  " asso- 
ciate with  Mr.  So-and-so ;  keep  him  at  arm's  length ;  he  is 
treacherous  ;  he  is  betraying."  I  repeat  it,  that  no  less  than 
seven  persons  have  suffered  in  their  characters  exceedingly 
by  the  allegation  that  they  were  in  fault ;  the  answer  was — 
"  They  have  nothing  to  betray — much  good  may  it  do  them ; 
they  will  invent."  Now,  it  is  an  acknowledged  fact,  that 
informers,  who  have  nothing  to  tell,  invent.  Now  I  ask,  after 
all  the  rumors  which  have  been  afloat,  did  you  not  every  one 
of  you  expect,  when  you  came  here,  to  learn  something — did 
you  not  expect  to  have  some  plot  discovered — to  hear  of  some 
secret  organization— to  hear  some  private  conversation  regard- 
ing these  traversers  given  in  evidence,  influencing  and  altering 


200  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  o'CONNELL. 

tlie  nature  of  tlieir  public  acts  ?  If  you  were  so  fortunate  as 
not  to  expect  tliis,  you  certainly  have  not  been  disappointed  ; 
but  if  you  entertained  the  expectation,  was  ever  disappoint- 
ment so  complete  and  unmitigated?  Go  where  you  please, 
and  you  will  hear  it  said,  "  Oh  !  is  that  all  the  Attorney-Gene- 
ral has  done  ?  has  he  nothing  more  to  say  ?  "We  knew  all 
that  before  !"  A  conspiracy !  this  is  a  conspiracy !  Aye,  gen- 
tlemen, what  has  become  of  the  dark  designs,  the  stratagems, 
the  foul  conspiracy,  the  government  chimeras  dire  of  the 
imagination?  What  has  become  of  them?  They  are  vfin- 
ished.  There  is  nothing  new,  nothing  disclosed — there  is 
nothing  to  be  concealed.  It  would  have  been  the  duty,  I 
don't  deny  it,  it  would  have  been  the  duty  of  the  government 
to  prove  conspii'acy  if  such  a  thing  existed.  Gentlemen  of  the 
jmy,  they  had  inclination  to  prove,  but  they  could  not.  You 
perceive  with  what  interest  they  forward  every  part  of  this 
case,  but  above  all,  the  strong  and  striking  interest  they  have 
in  discovering  evidence  of  real  facts,  of  existing  facts — with 
what  interest  they  hunt  out  the  conspirators,  and  follow  them 
to  their  caves  and  recesses.  Every  power,  all  that  influence, 
and  wealth,  and  authority  could  do,  has  been  exerted.  The 
expectation  of  promotion  has  been  ventured — ^promotion  in  the 
constabulary  :  every  temptation  held  out,  but  all  in  vain — for 
one  very  plain  and  simple  reason — there  was  nothing  to  be- 
tray, and  you  know  that.  Well,  then,  what  is  the  evidence  ? 
If  there  was  nothing  new,  let  us  see  what  the  old  evidence  is. 
"  The  hfe,"  they  say,  "  of  an  old  coat  is  a  new  button."  What 
does  the  evidence  consist  of  ?  First,  meetings ;  next,  newspa- 
pers. They  spell  out  an  undefined  conspiracy — that  conspi- 
racy existing  in  the  imagination — a  conspu'acy  without  posi- 
tion or  time ;  and  to  prove  that  conspu'acy,  they  produce  ac- 
counts of  meetings  and  volumes  of  newspapers. 

We  win  consider  each  of  these  consecutively.  Fii'st  of  all, 
you  allow  me  to  make  this  observation,  as  there  is  nothing  se- 
cret. I  ask  you  what  could  tempt  me,  an  old  lawyer,  to  enter 
publicly  into  a  conspiracy  ?  I  boasted  that  I  kept  the  public 
free  from  the  meshes  of  the  law — I  say  that  I  boasted  of 
this.  You  have  heard  the  statement  read  at  least  twenty 
times.     I  boasted  of  preventing  men  from  violating  the  law 


SPEECH  IN  DEFENCE   OF  HIMSELF.  201 

Now,  do  any  of  you  believe  that,  after  this,  I  could  enter  into 
a  public  conspiracy  ?  You  might  say,  if  there  was  something 
private — something  secret,  you  might  then  say,  "  the  old  law- 
yer thought  he  would  be  secure  of  his  co-conspirators ;"  but 
there  is  nothing  secret.  Under  all  all  these  cu'cumstances  you 
may,  perhaps,  have  a  more  terrible  opinion  of  me  than  those 
who  I  will  venture  to  say  know  me  better.  You  know  me 
principally  through  the  medium  of  the  calumnies  and  abuse 
heaped  upon  me  by  those  parties  against  whom  I  am  op- 
posed, but  there  is  not  one  of  you  can  consider  me  such  a 
blockhead,  such  an  idiot,  as  that  I  should  pubhcly  conspire  to 
ruin  the  cause  which  is  nearest  to  my  heart — to  ruin  a  cause 
which  has  been  the  darhng  object  of  my  ambition — that  I 
should  ruin  the  prospect  of  that  for  which  I  refused  to  go  on 
the  bench,  and  the  offer  of  being  the  INIaster  of  the  Eolls. 
It  is  a  question  whether  I  did  not  refuse  the  Chief  Baronship 
before  ever  it  was  offered — but  there  is  no  question  that  I  did 
refuse  the  offer  of  the  Mastership  of  the  Eolls- 

Gentlemen,  I  know  that  I  have  but  a  short  time  to  labor  in 
my  vocation  here,  and  that  there  is  an  eternity  on  which  I 
must  soon  enter.  I  approach  that  judgment  which  cannot 
be  long  postponed,  and  do  you  beheve  that  under  such  cir- 
cumstances I  would  be  guilty  of  that  with  which  I  stand 
charged?  Ah,  no,  you  do  not  think  I  would  have  the 
cruelty,  the  folly,  to  enter  into  such  a  conspu'acy.  You  do  not 
believe  I  would  have  the  absurdity  to  enter  into  that  conspi- 
racy. As  Irish  gentlemen,  put  your  hands  to  your  hearts,  and 
say  do  you  beheve  it  ?  I  am  sure  you  do  not.  Pardon  me  if 
I  have  made  too  fi'ee,  but  I  will  say  there  is  not  one  of  you 
can  spell  a  conspiracy  out  of  all  that  was  laid  before  you  dur- 
ing the  eleven  hours  in  which  the  Attorney-General  was  ring- 
ing changes  on  that  word,  going  backwards  and  forwards,  from 
meeting  to  meetuig,  and  from  pohceman  to  pohceman,  in  col- 
ored clothes  and  out  of  colored  clothes — not  one  of  you  can 
beheve  that  any  such  conspiracy  ever  existed.  I  proclaim, 
firmly,  you  cannot  beheve  it.  I  know  your  verdict  may 
imprison  me,  and  shorten  the  few  days  yet  before  me,  but  it 
cannot  take  from  me  the  consciousness  that  I  am  entitled  to 
your  acquittal,  and  that  there  is  not  a  man  of  you  who  would 


202  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

pronounce  a  verdict  of  guilty  tliat  would  not  himself  be  con- 
scious of  its  being  a — mistake.  Perhaps  what  the  Attorney- 
General  wants  you  to  beheve  is,  that  I  was  a  conspirator 
without  knowing  it — that  I  fell  into  a  conspiracy  as  a  man 
falls  into  a  pit  might,  without  knowing  it  was  there.  This 
was  in  the  open  day.  I  saw  the  pitfall.  Everything  was 
clear,  and  if  you  believe  anything  against  me,  you  must  be- 
lieve I  was  a  conspirator  without  knowing  it — a  conspirator 
ignorant  of  conspiracy — and  that  is  the  question  you  are 
selected  to  try.  In  the  technicahty  of  law,  I  would  say  that 
even  in  that  case  there  could  be  no  guilt,  for  there  can  be  no 
guilt  without  guilty  intention :  but  I  scorn  to  make  points  of 
law — as  a  matter  of  common  sense  this  is  plain  and  obvious, 
and,  I  trust  I  may  say  irresistible. 

Oh,  this  is  a  curious  invention — this  sweeping  conspiracy  of 
the  Attorney-General !  It  has  been  so  powerfully  put  to  you 
already  that  I  shall  not  repeat  it  at  any  length,  that  there 
would  be  an  end  to  every  great  movement  for  the  amelioration 
of  human  institutions  if  you  were  to  concede  to  the  Attorney- 
General's  conspiracy,  which  has  neither  been  stated  nor 
proved.  It  is  a  new  invention  made  at  this  side  of  the  water. 
Some  exceedingly  sagacious  person  here  first  dreamed  of  it ; 
and  you  were  to  be  put  as  it  were  into  a  sleep  with  this  incu- 
bus— this  imaginary  conspiracy — conspiracy  resting  on  your 
consciences  and  minds.  But  why  was  it  not  sooner  invented  ? 
There  was  the  slave  trade — would  that  ever  be  abohshed  if  the 
Attorney-General's  doctrine  of  conspiracy  had  been  enforced 
as  law  ?  Would  it  ever  have  been  abohshed  if  the  judges  of 
the  King's  Bench  had  given  this  doctrine  of  conspiracy  the 
sanction  of  their  authority  ?  The  advocates  of  the  abolition 
of  the  slave  trade  had  their  public  meetings,  they  had  *theu' 
monster  meetings — they  had  theu'  aggregate  meetings — they 
had  then-  private  meetings ;  they  pubhshed  the  guilt  of  the 
West  India  planters,  and  the  cruelty  of  the  slave-owners ; 
they  made  themselves  bitter,  unrelenting  enemies  by  so  do- 
ing ;  for  it  is  astonishing  how  much  malignity  arises  from  that 
inherent,  unhappy  propensity  in  man  for  power  and  authority. 
There  never  was  a  more  formidable  party  than  that  which  was 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  203 

arrayed  against  the  slave-owners.  They  might  have  looked 
in  the  newspapers,  and  found  every  species  of  guilt  charged 
against  them  by  Wilberforce  and  others.  Why  was  not  "Wil- 
berforce  charged  with  conspiracy  ?  That  man  who  wrote  his 
name  on  pages  of  the  most  briUiant  history  and  humanities  of 
men,  who  will  be  revered  as  long  as  worth,  generosity,  and 
piety  are  in  the  world.  Oh !  he  might  have  stood,  as  the 
humble  individual  before  you  stands,  accused  of  conspiracy, 
because  he  sought  to  put  an  end  to  the  thralldom  of  the 
slaves.  The  venerable  Clarkson,  who  is  still  ahve,  might  also 
be  charged  with  conspkacy,  and  thus  rendered  unsafe  in  his 
honored  old  age. 

Ah !  gentlemen,  do  not  presume  to  interfere  between  hu- 
manity and  its  resources.  Do  not  venture  to  arrest  the  pro- 
gress of  any  movement  for  the  amelioration  of  the  institutions 
of  the  country.  Do  not  attempt  to  take  away  from  your  fel- 
low subjects  the  legitimate  mode  of  effecting  useful  purposes 
by  public  meetings,  public  convassing — speaking  bold  truths 
boldly  and  firmly.  Shut  not  men  up  in  dark  corners — drive 
them  not  into  concealment — send  them  not  back  into  conspi- 
racy, for  then  they  would  really  conspire.  In  the  name  of 
Wilberforce  and  Clarkson  I  conjure  you  to  dismiss  from  your 
box  with  honest  and  zealous  indignation  every  attempt  to  pre- 
vent the  millions  from  seeking  peaceably  and  quietly  to  obtain 
an  amelioration  of  existing  institutions.  There  may  be  a  ht- 
tle  ingenuity  displayed  in  reference  to  this  comparison  of  the 
present  movement  with  that  for  the  abohtion  of  slavery,  and  a 
distinction  may  be  taken.  There  is  a  distinction,  but  the  prin- 
ciple is  the  same. 

The  next  conspiracy  was  for  the  abohtion  of  the  slave 
trade.  I  rejoice  that  I  was  a  sharer  in  that  conspiracy.  I 
care  not  though  the  gloom  of  a  prison  should  close  upon  me, 
my  heart  rewards  me  with  the  consideration  that  humble,  un- 
gifted,  and  undistinguished  as  I  am,  I  had  the  honor  to  be  ■ 
long  to  that  conspiracy  by  which  the  slave  trade  was  abol- 
ished. I  attended  a  meeting  for  that  purpose,  and  poured 
out,  perhaps  with  more  talent  than  the  inspu^ation  of  hberty 
could  ever  give  for  anything  else,  my  indignant  load  of  con- 


204  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL    O'CONNELL. 

tempt  on  those  wlio  practiced  slavery  and  trampled  under  foot 
the  humanity  and  kindliness  of  our  nature.  I  had  a  share  in 
that  movement.  Oh,  how  would  they  have  stared  if  this  doc- 
trine of  conspiracy  was  sooner  invented,  and  the  slave  bound 
forever,  till  somebody  with  milk  and  water  accents — with 
mild  tea-table  talk  endeavored  to  persuade  some  one  to  abol- 
ish it,  imtil  some  one  went  to  America  and  spoke  soft  things 
to  the  owners  of  the  negroes,  and  having,  in  as  gentle  a  way 
as  possible,  insinuated  the  atrocities  practiced  towards  the 
slaves,  then,  by  and  by  to  coax  the  owners,  and  win  upon 
them  to  consent  to  the  aboUtion  of  slavery.  Oh,  gentlemen, 
it  was  the  calling  down  of  pubhc  indignation — the  rousing  of 
all  that  was  virtuous  in  the  public  mind,  and  that  Heaven  de- 
scended spirit  of  persevering,  open,  bold  humanity  that  shook 
off  the  fetters  of  the  negro,  and  re-established  him  in  free- 
dom. What  would  become  of  reform  in  parhament  if  such 
demonstrations  of  pubhc  opinion  had  not  been  made  ?  Was 
there  a  man  among  the  Whig  aristocracy  that  did  not  approve 
of  it,  not  join  in  such  demonstrations  ?  Were  there  not  great 
meetings  held?  You  have  heard  of  the  Birmingham  meet- 
ings, and  hundreds  of  other  meetings  for  the  purpose  of  ob- 
taining parliamentary  reform.  What  reform  in  parhament 
could  be  obtained  without  such  meetings  ?  Would  the  addi- 
tional reform  promised  in  the  Queen's  speech  ever  be  carried, 
if  England  did  not  assemble  in  her  countless  thousands? 
And  in  Ireland  the  agitation  for  Repeal  had  already  extract- 
ed promises  of  good  for  Ireland,  even  from  those  who  had 
been  the  enemies  of  the  restoration  of  the  Irish  parliament. 

At  the  time  of  the  agitation  for  Cathohc  emancipation,  the 
most  eminent  lawyer  of  the  period — and  the  Attorne3''-Gen- 
eral  will  not  think  that  I  pay  him  no  respect  when  I  say  he 
was  his  superior,  certainly  his  equal.  He  was  an  eminent 
lawyer,  and  had  a  strong,  and  perhaps  conscientious,  antipa- 
thy to  Catholic  emancipation.  I  do  beheve  there  was  no 
more  decided  or  honest  opponent  of  that  measure  than  Mr. 
Saurin.  He  thought  the  law  was  violated  by  that  agitation. 
He  prosecuted  some  of  those  engaged  in  it.  He  was  defeated 
in  one  trial,  and  he  succeeded  in  another.     But  wo  aid  he  ever 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  ,  205 

dream — would  he  in  the  very  wildness  of  imagination  think  of 
turning  the  efforts  made  for  Catholic  emancipation  into  a  con- 
spiracy ?  I  was  prosecuted  for  words  spoken.  My  friend  on 
my  left  (Mr.  Sheil)  was  prosecuted  for  words  spoken,  but  the 
Attorney- General  never  thought  of  violating  the  constitution 
by  turning  those  efforts  for  emancipation  into  a  conspiracy. 
Yet  had  not  we  our  county  meetings — our  simultaneous  meet- 
ings ?  Did  not,  on  the  30th  of  January,  1829,  all  the  Catho- 
lics of  all  the  parishes  in  Ireland  meet  ?  Was  that  evidence 
of  a  conspiracy  ?  Upon  one  day  every  parish  in  Ireland  met. 
On  one  day  they  proclaimed  a  determination  to  persevere 
till  they  obtained  reUgious  equahty.  No  man  ever  di'eamed 
of  turning  that  into  a  conspiracy.  It  was  reserved  for  our 
time — it  was  reserved  for  our  day — it  was  reserved  for  the 
glory  of  the  present  Attorney-General  to  have  found  out  that 
which  none  of  his  predecessors  could  possibly  discover. 

Gentlemen,  at  the  present  moment  a  very  serious  question 
is  in  agitation  in  England — the  Corn  Law  League.  I  care  not 
what  your  opinions  are  with  regard  to  that  question — I  mean 
no  disrespect — they  say  the  object  of  that  league  is  to  obtain 
cheap  bread  for  the  poor,  and  an  increased  market  for  labor. 
I  do  not  mean  to  argue  the  point  with  you  ;  we  have  enough 
of  our  own.  They  have  held  many  meetings,  they  have  used 
the  boldest  language,  and  the  Eev.  Mr.  Fisher  has  accused 
them  of  *%iciting  to  assassination  and  incendiarism.  We  are 
free  from  that  accusation,  we  are  free  from  the  slighest  imputa- 
tion, and  is  this  case  to  be  sent  over  to  England  to  put  down 
that  glorious  struggle  ?  and  is  the  attempt  to  give  cheap  bread 
to  the  poor  to  be  turned  into  conspiracy?  Oh  no,  gentle- 
men, no !  The  English  are  safe  in  the  glorious  integrity  of  theu' 
jury  bos  ;  there  won't  be  a  single  juryman  sworn  to  try  them 
who  differs  with  them  in  opinion — there  w^on't  be  a  juryman 
sworn  who  even  differed  with  "vdolence  upon  any  prhiciple  with 
the  traversers.  No ;  the  Englishmen  are  safe — I  was  wrong 
in  saying  they  were  in  danger — the  Englishmen  are  safe  in  the 
protection  of  their  jury  box — and  do  you,  gentlemen,  protect 
us  as  the  English  protect  them.  Indeed,  it  is  manifest,  if  the 
Attorney-General  triumphs  in  this  case,  no  great  grievance 
can  be  redressed. 


206  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL    o'CONNELL. 

Wlien  authority  and  power  are  interested  it  requires  a  more 
cogent  argument  than  justice  to  obtain  relief,  and  it  is  only 
obtained  by  the  power  of  pubHc  demonstration,  and  the  accu- 
mulated weight  of  public  opinion.     A  French  author  says — I 
do  not  quote  him  as  an  authority,  for  no  man  hates  French 
infidehty    and    French    republican    opinions    more    than   I 
do ;  but  a  French  author  says  that   "  You  cannot   make   a 
revolution  with  rose  water."     He  would  make  it  with  blood 
— I  would  make  it  with  public  opinion,  and  I  would  put  a  little 
Irish  spirit  in  it.     But  I  come  to  the  menagerie  of  evidence 
which  sustains  this  case.     I  told  you  there  were  two  classes 
of  evidence — if  I  am  not  wrong  in  using  the  words  monster 
meetings  and  newspaper  pubhcations — we  will  take  each  of 
them.     I  am  not  here  to  deny  that  these  meetings  took  place. 
I  admit  that  they  were  held.    I  admit  that  the  people  attended 
them  in  hundreds  and  hundreds  of  thousands,  but  it  has  been 
said  that  the  magnitude  of  these  meetings  would  alone  make 
them  illegal.     I  do  not  discuss  that  question.     I  do  not  give 
it  weight  enough  to  do  so.     But  I  again  admit  that  they  took 
place,  and  I  will  ask  you,  was  any  hfe  lost  at  any  of  those 
meetings  ?     You  will  answer  no !   not  one !     Was  any  man, 
woman,  or  child  injured  ?    You  will  answer  no  !  unanimously 
no !     Did  an  accident  happen  to  any  hving  thing  so  as  to  in- 
jure it  in  the   shghtest  degree  ?     Was  there  a  single  female, 
young  or  old,  exposed  to  the  shghtest  indelicacy  ?     Was  there 
one  shilling's  worth  of  property  destroyed  at  any  one  of  those 
meetings  ?     You  will  answer  me,  unanimously  no !     Oh,  but  I 
forgot — there  was  a   pohceman  in   colored  clothes  who   de- 
scribed a  ferocious  assault  made  by  the  people  coming  in  from 
Carlow,  which  very  nearly  overturned  the  gingerbread  and  ap- 
ple  stands  of  the  old  women — and  the   amount  of  \dolence 
perpetrated  was  the  overturning  of  some  gingerbread  stands. 
If  there  had  been  any  violence  committed  would  we  not  have 
heard  of  it  ?   would  it  not  have  been  proved  by  the  poHcemeu 
or  magistrates  who  attended  ? 

Oh,  gentlemen,  it  is  ridiculous — that  is,  it  is  the  prosecutions 
which  are  so.  There  was  no  violence,  no  battery,  no  assault, 
no  injury  to  property,  not  the  least  violation  of  morahty,  or 
even  of  good  manners.     Not  one  accident  happened  at  one  of 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  207 

those  meetings ;  not  even  a  casual  accident ;  and  if  I  incited 
the  people,  and  had  them  ready  for  rebellion,  would  they  have 
been  thus  restrained?  and  would  they  not  have  committed 
outrages  by  which  their  feelings  would  have  been  manifested  ? 
But  no,  so  completely  were  they  devoid  of  ill-feehng,  so  com- 
pletely had  every  harmonizing  influence  sway  over  them,  that 
grown  mothers  and  young  mothers  carried  their  infants  with 
them  as  their  best  and  surest  protection.    Oh,  it  would  delight 
you  to  have  seen  them !  The  men  stood  back  for  them  to  pass ! 
the  mothers  and  daughters  knew  that  they  had  their  husbands 
and  brothers  there,  and  so  help  me  Heaven !  I  withdraw  the 
violence  of  expression,  and  I  say,  that  there  could  not  have 
been  a  more  convincing  and  triumphant  e"sddence  of  the  total, 
absence  of  irritated  feelings,  than  the  kind  of  feeling  which 
they  evinced.     I  turn  boldly  and  say,  the  world  does  not  pro- 
duce a  country  where  such  meetings  could  take  place.     They 
could  only  occur  among  this  calumniated  people,  who,  accord- 
ing to   the   Times,   are  "  a  filthy  and  felonious   multitude." 
Yes,  there  are  no  people  on  the  face  of  the  earth,  except  the 
Ii'ish  people  alone,  who  could  afford  such  a  specimen  of  moral 
dignity  and  elevation.     They  have  been  educated  to  it — forty 
years  have  they  been  so — the  Emancipation  educated  them, 
and  now  they  are  sublimed  into  peaceful  determination.    They 
will  not  be  ruffled  by  anything  which  may  have  happened  in 
this  court.     They  will  abide  your  verdict ;  they  may  disap- 
prove of  it  if  it  is  unfavorable,  but  they  will  not  be  guilty  of 
the  slightest  violation  of  the  law.     But  was  any  one  intimi- 
dated by  those  meetings  ?    They  could  have  produced  magis- 
trates or  policemen,  one  by  one,  to  prove  their  intimidation. 
They  could  have  produced  the  most  timid,  either  in  pantaloons 
or  petticoats,  to  prove  there  was  intimidation.    "With  the  most 
ample  means  of  proof,  there  is  the  greatest  neglect  of  evidence. 
My  lord,  I  appeal  to  your  lordships,  if  there  was  one  particle 
of  intimidation — is  there  one  particle  of  such  evidence  l^efore 
you?     And  is  it  not  thoroughly  certain  that  it  is  so  only  be- 
cause such  evidence  is  not  in  existence  ?     Gentlemen  of  the 
jury,  it  is  not  that  alone — it  is  not  purely  inferential — the 
pohce  were  at  the  meetings ;  they  might  have  asked  if  any 
one  complained  to  them — whether  the  most  timid  person  in 


208  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

the  neighborhood  or  vicinage  expressed  alarm  or  apprehen- 
sion. They  asked  them  no  such  question ;  it  had  been  an- 
swered already. 

Now,  my  lord,  there  was  another  feature  in  those  meetings,  to 
which  I  shall  beg  to  call  your  attention.  There  was  not  one  of 
those  meetings  at  which  any  mandate  from  authority  was  dis- 
regarded ;  no  proclamation  was  disregarded,  no  magisterial 
warning  resisted  in  the  lightest  degree.  There  was  no  message 
or  personal  intimation  from  any  justice  of  the  peace  treated 
with  disregard — no  police  inspector,  or  sub-inspector,  or  con- 
stable disobeyed.  Recollect  that,  my  lords — ^remember  that, 
gentlemen  of  the  jury.  There  is  not  the  slightest  .evidence  of 
even  the  smallest  disregard  of  legal  authority.  If  we  were 
seditious,  why  did  we  not  get  some  warning  ?  Why  was  there 
not  a  proclamation  issued  against  these  meetiugs?  Oh!  but 
there  was  a  proclamation  at  length.  I  do  not  hke  to  enter 
upon  any  angry  topic  ;  but  that  proclamation  was  immediately 
obeyed.  You  have  no  evidence  of  any  conspiracy  in  any  one  of 
them,  no  evidence  of  anything  but  a  ready  submission  and 
obedience  to  the  law.  Conspiracy — shame  on  those  who  in- 
vented such  a  term,  as  applied  to  men  laboring,  as  we  were, 
in  the  sacred  cause  of  our  country's  hberty — obeying  the  laws, 
committing  no  violence.  No,  my  lords,  no.  We  have  had 
many  misfortunes  in  this  country,  many  afflictions,  many 
things  to  endure.  Oh,  gentlemen,  your  verdict  will  not  be  an 
additional  one.  It  will  be  such  a  verdict  as  will  calm  the 
troubled  waters.  If  those  meetings  were  tranquil  before,  why 
there  is  no  need  of  it.  If  the  language  was  harsh  or  violent 
your  verdict  will  soothe  and  soften  it.  Even  the  excuse  of 
violent  language  they  shall  never  have  again.  No,  gentlemen, 
they  were  not  illegal  meetings,  they  were  meetings,  as  I  will 
show  you,  suited  to  the  purpose  they  had  in  view.  If  it  were 
at  one,  or  two,  or  three,  or  ten  of  them  that  tranquillity  had 
prevailed,  it  would,  perhaps,  seem  casual,  but  at  every  one  of 
them  the  behavior  of  the  people  was  the  same.  The  entire 
thirty-seven  included  in  the  indictment  come  withiu  the  same 
catalogue.  It  could  have  been  by  nothing  but  design,  when 
you  accumulate  the  number,  that  the  same  peaceful  demeanor 
prevailed  at  all  of  them.     The  government  knew  of  them  ;  why 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  209 

was  not  their  illegality  previously  imputed  to  them,  if  it  ex- 
isted ?  I  am  not  one  of  those  who  would  insinuate  or  say 
that  the  Attorney-General  meant  to  urge  them  into  criminality, 
in  order  that  he  might  pounce  upon  them.  I  say  no  such 
thing — I  would  do  him  more  justice.  He  did  not  previously 
interfere,  because  there  were  no  grounds  for  a  prosecution — 
there  was  nothing  to  warrant  his  interference.  That  is  his 
defence.  And  I  do  not  attach  any  criminality  to  him  for  not 
having  interfered  with  them  before. 

[Mr.  O'Connell  here  had  a  short  conver  sation  with  Mr.  Shiel, 
after  which  the  learned  gentleman  resumed.] 

I  am  told  that  I  used  an  equivocal  word — I  said  that  those 
meetings  were  quiet  by  design.  I  repeat  it.  The  design  pre- 
existed long  before  one  of  them  was  held — the  design  to  be 
quiet  and  peaceable  existed,  and  it  will  continue  to  exist. 
There  was  no  such  arrangement  for  any  particular  meeting. 
That  was  the  education  which  I  spoke  of  the  Irish  people 
having  received — the  education  that  the  only  certain  way  to 
establish  their  rights,  and  to  obtain  valuable  amehoration  and 
free  institutions,  was  by  peaceable  conduct  and  obedience  to 
the  laws.  I  ask  you,  gentlemen,  what  evidence  is  there  of  a 
conspiracy  from  what  has  passed  at  any  of  these  meetings  ? 
I  leave  it  to  your  conscience — to  your  integrity,  to  answer  the 
question.  "What  care  I  what  your  politics  are — ^you  will  an- 
swer before  your  Maker  for  the  verdict  you  pronounce — I 
leave  the  responsibihty  to  you.  This  is  one  part  of  the  con- 
spiracy, and  the  next  is  the  pubHcations  in  the  newspapers. 
Do  not  imagine  I  am  going  to  detain  you  in  canvassing  all  the 
phrases  and  sentences  that  have  appeared  in  these  papers.  I 
am  not.  You  have  been  powerfully  addressed  on  that  topic 
already.  I  shall  take  up  the  general  nature  of  the  evidence 
of  those  newspapers,  from  which  you  are  called  upon  to 
fabricate  a  conspiracy.  I  submit  that,  with  the  exception  of 
what  is  proved  to  have  been  delivered  by  me,  the  evidence  of 
tiiese  newspapers  is  no  evidence  against  me,  unless  the  con- 
spiracy is  first  proved.  And  see  what  a  circle  that  would  lead 
you  into.  Are  you  to  find  the  evidence  of  conspiracy  from 
the  newspapers  ?     The  newspapers  are  no  evidence  against  me 


210  SELECT  SPEECHES   OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

unless  I  be  first  proved  to  be  a  conspirator.    Be  that  as  it  may, 
I  sliall  leave  it  to  the  court  as  a  matter  of  law,  but  I  leave  to 
you  the  weight,  the  worth  of  the  evidence,  should  that  evidence 
go  to  you  at  all.    Suppose  it  does,  what  is  there  in  it  against 
me  ? — what  is  its  substantial  weight  against  me  ?  Is  there  any 
proof  that  I  ever  saw  one  of  those  newspapers  ?    Is  there  any 
proof  of  any  connexion  between  me  and  those  newspapers  ?   It 
will  appear  by  the  dates  that  when  some  of  the  harshest  pas- 
sages in  them  were  printed  I  was  not  in  town — ^I  was  attending 
those  meetings  in  the  country,  and  it  was  moved  that  at  the 
association  I  distinctly  disavowed  that  any  newspaper  was  the 
organ  of  it.     But  it  is  said  that  we  circulated  these  newspa- 
papers.     See  what  the  fact  is.    Those  who  subscribed  a  certain 
amount  allocated  a  portion  of  it,  according  to  our  rules,  to  the 
purchase  of  a  newspaper,  and  they  were  entitled  to  any  paper 
they  might  select.     The  evidence  is  not  that  we  selected  any 
newspaper  for  them,  but  they  ordered  any  one  they  pleased  ; 
and  bear  in  mind  at  the  same  time  that  we  proclaimed  that 
not  one  of  them  was  the  organ  of  the  association.     It  is  said 
that  these  newspapers  contained  libels.     If  they  did  why  were 
they  not  prosecuted  ?     They  were  answerable  for  it  under  the 
law  of  libel.     That  should  be  our  protection,  if  there  were 
Hbels  in  them.     The  Attorney-General  was  competent  to  in- 
stitute a  prosecution.     It  was  not  our  duty  to  examine  them — • 
it  was  his.     But  the  fact  is,  the  Attorney-General  would  have 
prosecuted  every  one  of  those  newspapers  long   ago   if  he 
thought  it  worth  his  while. 

Every  great  newspaper  "  we,"  imagines  himself  a  man  of 
great  importance  ;  but  when  once  these  newspapers  are  read 
— if  read  at  all — they  are  forgotten  ;  and,  I  would  venture  to 
say,  that  not  a  particle  of  what  is  charged  here  as  pubhshed 
by  them  would  be  thought  of  now  if  it  was  not  for  these  trials. 
They  are  ephemeral  productions — we  are  accustomed  to 
them — they  are  either  read  and  forgotten,  or  not  read  a^d 
passed  by.  But  what  is  it  they  are  charged  with  ?  Exciting 
the  people  to  violence  and  tumult.  Did  any  one  of  them 
produce  such  an  effect?  Was  there  any  sort  of  violence 
among  the  people  ?  You,  gentlemen,  have  to  decide  whether 
that  pohtical  problem  I  have   sought  to  solve — ^whether  the 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  211 

political  theory  I  have  sought  to  realize,  that  which  has  been 
the  leading  principle  of  my  pohtical  life — is  one  in  its  nature 
to  be  considered  fairly,  honestly,  and  liberally.  Yes,  gentle- 
men, if  you  thus  regard  it  you  will  take  the  whole  tenor  of  my 
past  Hfe  into  consideration  before  you  come  to  a  conclusion  as 
to  the  verdict  which  you  ought  to  return,  and  you  will  form 
your  judgment  by  a  reference  to  the  great  and  leading  princi- 
ples of  my  pohtical  career. 

It  appears  to  me  that  the  Attorney-General  himself,  if  I 
did  not  misconceive  the  drift  of  his  observations,  admitted 
the  peaceable  nature  of  my  intentions  ;  and  of  this  there  cer* 
tainly  can  be  no  doubt,  that  the  newspapers  which  have  been 
given  in  evidence  against  me  are  full  to  overflowing  with  my 
admonitions  to  the  people  to  observe  the  laws  and  to  yield 
the  most  implicit  obedience  to  everything  having  the  shape 
and  semblance  of  legal  authority.  Evidence  the  most  con- 
vincing has  been  adduced,  even  by  the  Crown,  to  demonstrate 
what  the  great  principle  was  upon  which  the  Repeal  move- 
ment was  founded  and  designed.  It  has  been  proved  to  you 
that  this  maxim  received  universal  acceptation  among  us — 
that  the  man.  who  commits  a  crime  gives  strength  to  the 
enemy.  This  sentiment  was  printed  upon  flags  and  banners 
— it  was  attached  to  all  our  documents — ^it  was  inscribed  upon 
our  platform,  and  painted  on  the  walls  of  the  association. 
It  was  universally  acknowledged  among  us  as  the  cardinal 
maxim  of  our  political  hves,  and  was  the  topic  of  our  con- 
versation. We  left  nothing  undone  to  impress  upon  the  minds 
of  those  who  joined  the  movement  that  the  man  who  com- 
mitted an  offence  against  the  law  gave  strength  to  whoever 
might  be  the  enemy  of  our  cause.  Such  was  the  principle 
that  we  proclaimed.  It  may  be  said  that  it  was  one  that 
savored  of  hostihty  ;  but  if  so,  it  had  only  a  stronger  effect  on 
that  account.  You  have  heard  again  and  again  of  my  as- 
sertion that  the  most  desirable  of  all  political  amehorations 
were  purchased  at  too  dear  a  price  if  they  could  only  be  ob- 
tained at  the  expense  of  human  blood.  That  is  the  principle 
of  my  pohtical  career ;  and  if  I  stand  prominent  among  men 
for  an^^hing,  it  is  for  the  fearless  and  unceasing  announcement 
of  that  principle. 


212  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF    DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

From  the  day  when  first  I  entered  the  arena  of  poUtics  until 
the  present  hour  I  have  never  neglected  an  opportunity  of 
impressing  upon  the  minds  of  my  fellow-countrymen  the  fact, 
that  I  was  an  apostle  of  that  pohtical  sect  who  held  that  lib- 
erty was  only  to  be  attained  under  such  agencies  as  were 
strictly  consistent  with  the  law  and   the  constitution — that 
freedom  was  to  be  attained,  not  by  the   effusion  of  human 
blood,  but  by  the  constitutional  combination  of  good  and  wise 
men — by  perseverance  in  the  courses  of  tranquilKty  and  good 
order,  and  by  an  utter  abhorrence  of  violence  and  bloodshed.    It 
is  my  prudent  boast,  that  throughout  a  long  and  eventful  life 
I  have  faithfully  devoted  myseK  to  the  promulgation  of  that 
principle,  and,  without  vanity,  I  can  assert,  that  I  am  the  fii-st 
pubhc  man  who  ever  proclaimed  it.     Other  pohticians  have 
said,  '  win  your  hberties  by  peaceful  means  if  you  can,'  but 
there  was  a  arriere  pensee  in  this  admonition,  and  they  always 
had  in  contemplation  an  appeal  to  physical  force,  in  case 
other  means  should  prove  abortive.     But  I  am  not  one  of 
these.     I  have  preached  under  every  contingency,  and  I  have 
again  and  again  declared  my  intention  to  abandon  the  cause 
of  Repeal  if  a  single  drop  of  human  blood  were  shed  by  those 
who  advocated  the  measure.    I  made  the  same  principle  the 
basis  for  the  movement  in  favor  of  CathoHc  Emancipation ;  and 
it  was  by  a  rigid  adherence  to  that  principle  that  I  conducted 
the  movement  to  a  glorious  and  triumphant  issue.     It  is  my 
boast  that  Catholic  Emancipation,  and  every  achievement  of 
my  pohtical  life,  was  obtained  without  violence  and  blood- 
shed ;  and  is  it  fair,  I  ask  you,  gentlemen,  that  you  should  be 
called  upon  at  this  hour  of  the  day  to  interrupt  a  man  who 
has  laid  that  down  as  the  basis  of  his  pohtical  conduct,  and 
who  at  no  period  of  his  existence  was  ever  known  to  deviate 
from  the  maxim  ?     Is  it  right  that  men  of  honesty  and  intelli- 
gence should  be  called  upon  to  brand  now  as  a  participator  in 
conspiracy  the  man  who  has  been  preaching  peace,  law  and 
order  during  his  whole  life,  and  has  invariably  deprecated  and 
denounced  the  idea  that  the  objects  of  his  pohtical  hfe  were 
to  be  attained  by  an  appeal  to  violent  means  ? 

Gentlemen,  I  belong  to  a  Christian  persuasion,  with  whose 
members  it  is  a  principle  of  doctrinal  behef  that  no  advantage 


SPEECH  IN   HIS   OWN  DEFENCE.  213 

to  clnircli  or  state — no,  not  even  Heaven  can  be  sought  to  be 
attained  at  the  expense  of  any  crime  whatsoever  ;  that  no  sin 
is  to  be  justified  or  palliated  by  any  account  of  advantage, 
however  enormous,  that  may  possibly  be  obtained  by  its  com- 
mission. If  there  were  in  that  box  a  single  member  of  my 
own  religious  persuasion  there  would  be  no  necessity  for  my 
impressing  this  fact  upon  your  minds,  for  he  could  tell  you  that 
he  professed  that  same  doctrine  in  common  with  myself.  All 
my  life  I  have  studiously  endeavored  to  model  my  poHtical 
conduct  according  to  the  standard  of  that  maxim  of  my  reli- 
gious belief,  and,  therefore,  should  you  now  be  called  upon  to 
do  your  judgment  and  common  sense  the  violence  of  believing 
that  I  could  proclaim  one  thing  and  practice  another,  I  fear- 
lessly assert  that  there  is  no  circumstance  of  my  life,  from 
my  birth  to  the  present  hour,  which  can  warrant  you  in 
doubting  the  sincerity  of  my  professions.  It  will  appear  from 
reference  to  the  newspapers  that  have  been  given  in  evidence 
— and  even  though  there  were  no  newspapers,  the  fact  is  so 
notorious  as  to  admit  of  no  dispute — that  no  man  ever  pos- 
sessed so  much  of  the  confidence  of  the  Irish  people  as  I.  No 
man  enjoyed  it  so  unremittingly,  and  in  so  large  a  degree.  1 
have  obtained  the  confidence  of  all  classes  of  the  Cathohc 
laity,  not  of  the  poor  Catholics  alone  whose  condition  might 
be  ameliorated  by  any  charge  but  of  the  middle  and  higher 
classes  also.  I  have  also  the  honor  of  enjoying  the  confidence 
of  the  Catholic  clergy,  and  the  Catholic  episcopacy,  and  to 
what  am  I  to  attribute  the  possession  of  their  good  graces 
unless  to  the  assertion  of  this  principle  and  to  the  unswerving 
fidehty  with'  which  through  all  the  vicissitudes  of  my  pohtical 
Ufe  I  have  invariably  adhered  to  it.  How  long  could  I  possess 
their  confidence  if  I  were  the  base  deceiver  I  am  pictured  ? 
Not  an  hour.  But  I  possess  their  confidence,  because  they 
are  thoroughly  convinced  of  the  sincerity  and  integrity  of  pur- 
pose with  which  I  have  announced  my  sentiments. 

I  am  here  surrounded  by  my  countrymen,  who  have  con- 
fided their  cause  to  my  management,  for  no  other  reason  than 
that  they  have  the  fullest  possible  reliance  on  the  sincerity 
wdth  which,  during  a  period  of  forty  years,  I  have  proclaimed 
the  doctrine  that  the  man  who  committs  a  crime  injures  the 


214  SELECT    SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

cause  he  espouses,  and  strengthens  the  hands  of  those  who 
are  its  antagonists.  My  whole  life  is  a  refutation  of  the  accu- 
sation that  I  am  insincere ;  and  is  the  invidious  task  now  to 
be  assigned  to  you,  gentlemen,  of  branding  your  countrymen 
as  fools  and  dotards — men  who  patronize  hypocrisy,  and  who 
for  near  half  a  century  have  suffered  themselves  to  be  befooled 
and  deluded  by  empty  pretences  ?  The  pubhc  will  not  be- 
Heve  it — England  will  not  believe  it — nor  will  any  enhghtened 
country  in  creation  beheve  it.  I  am  here  pleading  before  the 
European  world.  I  am  here  pleading  the  cause  of  my  country 
before  a  jury  of  Protestant  gentlemen,  in  presence  of  the  kings 
and  people  of  the  universe,  and  with  what  amazement  will  they 
not  gaze  upon  you  if  by  a  verdict  which  doubts  for  a  moment 
the  sincerity  of  my  pohtical  professions,  you  brand  as  fools 
and  dotards  millions  of  your  Catholic  fellow  countrymen,  and 
with  them,  many,  very  many  Protestants  of  the  greatest  intel- 
ligence and  the  highest  possible  respectabihty.  No,  you  can- 
not for  a  moment  question  the  honest  sincerity  with  which  I 
have  ever  advocated  that  glorious  principle,  the  advocating  of 
which  was  the  pride  of  my  youth,  the  glory  of  my  manhood, 
and  the  comfort  of  my  declining  years.  I  feel  I  have  not  done 
you  justice  in  pressing  this  topic  at  such  length  upon  your 
consideration.  Such  prohxity  was  unnecessary ;  for  I  am 
sure  you  are  whoUy  incapable  of  taking  such  a  view  of  my 
conduct  as  that  insisted  on  by  the  Crown. 

The  only  farther  observation  which  I  will  offer  upon  this 
branch  of  the  case  is  merely  to  state  that  I  doubt  whether  my 
sincerity  in  this  respect  has  ever  been  questioned,  even  by  the 
most  implacable  of  my  enemies.  I  do  not  think  that  it  was 
ever  pubUcly  impugned,  and  certain  I  am  that  it  ought  never 
to  have  been  impugned  either  publicly  or  privately.  It  is  ut- 
terly impossible  for  me  to  believe  that  after  having  been  so 
successful  in  my  endeavor  to  obtain  popular  rights  by  means 
purely  consistent  with  justice,  humanity,  the  law,  and  the  con- 
stitution, I  could  now  fling  to  the  winds  every  principle  of  my 
bygone  life,  and  assume  the  character  and  play  the  part  of  a 
conspirator.  Nothing  in  my  public  conduct,  I  must  again  re- 
peat, could  justify  such  a  suspicion.  Nay,  I  fearlessly  aver, 
there  are  incidents  in  my  public  life  which  give  the  He  to  any 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE,  215 

sucli  suspicion.  Permit  me  to  instance  a  few  facts  :  you  must 
all  remember  what  a  frightful  combination  existed  eight  years 
ago  among  the  workmen  and  operatives  of  the  city  of  Dublin. 
Lives  were  lost  in  our  pubhc  streets,  or  men  were  assaulted 
with  such  brutal  violence  that,  if  death  did  not  ensue,  the  cir- 
cumstance was  to  be  attributed  rather  to  a  happy  accident  than 
to  any  forbearance  on  the  part  of  the  conspu-ators.  The  com- 
bination had  spread  to  such  a  dreadful  extent  that  the  pubhc 
authorities  were  unable  to  cope  with  it. 

It  has  been  frequently  alleged  against  me  by  my  enemies 
that  I  am  a  man  who  would  sacrifice  principle  to  popularity. 
How  stands  the  fact  ?  I  came  forward,  I  opposed  the  combi- 
nation pubHcly,  single-handed,  and  opposed  them  at  the  peril, 
not  only  of  my  popularity,  but  of  my  very  existence.  The  fact 
is  notorious  in  Dubhn.  At  the  meeting  in  the  Exchange  the 
operatives  were  infuriated  against  me,  and  I  owed  the  preser- 
vation of  my  life  to  the  police.  But  it  was  my  duty  to  oppose 
the  combination,  and  I  did  not  shrink  from  it ;  I  persevered 
in  it,  and  what  occurred  ?  I  persuaded  those  who  had  been 
most  ferocious  against  me,  and  from  that  day  to  this  not  a  sin- 
gle combination  outrage  has  occurred  in  Dublin.  I  opposed 
combination  at  the  expense  of  popularity — at  the  risk  of  Hfe  ; 
and  is  it  credible,  I  ask  you,  that  I  should  have  taken  that 
part  to  play  the  hypocrite  somewhere  else  ?  It  was  not  in 
that  alone  that  I  exhibited*  my  abhorrence  of  violence  of  any 
kind ;  for  don't  you  find  throughout  these  newspapers  my 
perpetual  opposition  to  Eibbonism  ?  have  they  not  read  over 
and  over  to  you  my  denunciations  of  Ribbonism — my  warning 
to  the  people — my  denunciations  of  the  system  to  the  poUce  ? 
caUing  on  them  in  time  to  stop  its  progress  ?  Oh,  if  there  was 
any  conspiracy,  would  I  not  be  glad  to  be  assisted  by  the  con- 
spirators ?  If  my  means  were  iniquitous,  would  I  not  have 
the  advantage  of  that  iniquity  ?  I  had  influence — I  had  'only 
to  countenance  the  Eibbonmen,  and  Heaven  knows  how  far 
it  would  have  extended !  It  has  been  stated  over  and  over 
again — it  is  part  of  the  prosecution — my  discountenance  of 
these  Ribbonmen ;  nay,  more,  my  resistance  to  all  secret  socie- 
ties— my  constant  denunciation  of  them.  Oh,  do  but  take 
these  thmgs  into  your  consideration,  and  say  in  your  con- 


216  SELECT  SPEECHES    OP  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

science,  if  you  can,  that  man  is  a  hypocrite,  who,  without  any- 
thing in  the  world  to  move  him  but  adherence  to  his  principles, 
flung  away  the  instrument  that  would  tarnish  his  cause,  how- 
ever useful  it  might  be. 

Another  thing  in  my  pubhc  life  was  that  I  opposed,  at  the 
risk  of  my  popularity,  and  loss  of  popularity,  the  present  sys- 
tem of  poor-laws.  With  the  influences  I  possess,  could  not  I 
have  roused  the  poverty  of  Ireland  against  its  property,  and 
insisted  that  all  that  were  poor  should  be  fed  by  all  that  were 
rich,  as  others  did  ?  No  ;  I  saw  the  danger  of  such  a  proceed- 
ing. I  was  taunted  by  many  a  sincere  friend — sneered  at  by 
men  who  have  joined  me  again.  No,  no  ;  I  consulted  my  con- 
science, and  that  conscience  told  me  that  the  real  nature  of 
the  provision  makes  more  destitute  than  it  relieves — that  its 
machinery  must  be  the  great  burden  on  the  property  of  the 
country.  But,  my  lords,  since  it  became  law,  I  have  not  given 
it  any  opposition.  I  have  allowed  the  experiment  to  be  tried, 
and  those  who  were  most  inimical  before  have  vowed  that  I 
was  right,  and  they  were  wrong,  and  I  am  ready  to  ameliorate 
it,  and  assist  its  working  if  I  can. 

Gentlemen,  you  also  recollect  it  is  given  in  evidence  the 
manner  of  my  answer  to  young  Mr.  Tyler's  speech  and  letter  ; 
you  saw  from  that  and  from  the  speech  given  in  evidence  by 
Mr.  Bond  Hughes ;  and  now,  my  lords,  as  I  have  mentioned 
that  name,  I  think  it  right  to  say  that  as  I  was  one  of  those 
convinced  that  that  gentleman  had  willfully  sworn  what  was 
not  true,  I  am  glad  to  have  mentioned  his  name,  because  it 
affords  me  an  opportunity  I  am  proud  to  take  of  stating,  that 
I  never  saw  a  witness  on  the  table  who  gave  his  evidence  more 
fairly  than  Mr.  Bond  Hughes,  and  I  am  thoroughly  convinced 
that  the  contradiction  in  his  evidence  was  a  mistake  that  any 
honest  man  might  fall  into.  It  is  not  part  of  this  case,  but  I 
am  sure  your  lordship  don't  think  me  wrong  in  making  this 
public  avowal. 

Gentlemen,  it  appears  by  his  report  also,  how  emphatically 
I  informed  the  Americans  that  we  were  anxious  for  symj^athy 
from  them,  but  that  we  would  take  no  part,  in  the  slightest 
degree,  disparagmg  of  our  allegiance.  But  that  is  put  still 
more  strongly  when  you  recollect  the  denunciations  I  made  of 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  217 

the  American  slave  owners.  Large  sums  of  money  were  sent 
from  the  American  slave-holding  states — the  remittances  were 
in  progress — money  was  in  progress  of  collection  in  Charles- 
ton, South  Carolina  ;  but  did  I  mitigate  my  tone,  or  moderate 
my  language  in  condemning  the  principle  of  slavery?  Did 
I  not  denounce  the  slave  owners  as  enemies  of  God  and  of 
man — as  culprits  and  criminals  ?  Did  I  not  compare  associa- 
tion with  them'  to  association  with  pickpockets  and  felons  ? 
Did  I  not  use  the  most  emphatic  language  to  express  my  de- 
nunciation of  the  horrible  traffic  in  human  beings — of  all  the 
immorality,  and  all  the  frightful  horrors  that  belong  to  that 
system  ?  Oh,  if  I  was  a  hypocrite,  would  I  not  have  passed 
over  the  topic  with  a  few  soft  words,  and  have  accepted  their 
sympathy.  Is  there  hypocrisy  in  my  pubhc  sentiments  that 
no  amehoration  in  any  pubhc  institution  can  be  worth  one  drop 
of  kood  ? 

Gentlemen,  you  have  in  the  newspapers,  also,  that  the  demo- 
cratic party  in  France,  headed  by  Monsieur  Ledru  EoUin, 
offered  us  sympathy  and  support.  It  is  a  considerable  party — 
it  is  a  powerful  party — it  is  the  party  that  hates  the  Enghsh — 
the  party  most  of  all  ferocious  against  England,  a  hatred  which 
arose  from  the  blow  their  vanity  got  at  Waterloo.  You  have 
my  answer  to  that  offer.  Did  I  seek  his  support,  or  the  sup- 
port of  his  party  ?  Did  I  mitigate  and  frame  my  answer  in  a 
way  that  I  should  appear  unwilling  to  accept  that  support,  but 
reaUy  allow  it  ?  No ;  I  took  the  firm  tone  of  loyalty — I  reject 
their  support — I  refused  the  offer ;  I  cautioned  him  against 
coming  over  here,  for  we  would  do  nothing  inconsistent  with 
our  loyalty;  and  is  that  the  way  in  which  my  hypocrisy  is 
proved  ?  Gentlemen,  it  was  not  that  party  in  France  alone 
that  I  defied.  Even  at  their  present  monarch  I  have  hurled 
my  defiance.  To  be  sure,  the  Attorney-General,  with  great 
ingenuity,  introduced  a  report  of  the  secret  committee  of  the 
House  of  Commons  in  Ireland,  in  1797,  and  he  said  we  were 
acting  on  that  plan.  They  were  looking  for  French  assist- 
ance— they  had  Irish  emissaries  in  France — they  had  prob- 
ably persons  representing  the  French  here — acting  on  the 
plan  ;  imitating  the  conduct  of  the  United  Irishmen  in  1797  ! 
Oh,  gentlemen,  it  was  directly  the  reverse. 


218  SELECT  SPEECHES   OF    DANIEL   O'CONNELL. 

It  may  be  said  I  speculate  on  the  restoration  of  the  elder 
branch  of  that  family — Henry  V.,  as  he  is  called.  I  would  be 
very  sorry  to  wait  for  a  Repeal  of  the  Union  till  that  occurs, 
not  that  I  disparage  his  title — for  my  opinion  is,  that  Europe 
will  never  be  perfectly  safe  until  that  branch  of  the  Bourbon 
family  be  restored  under  liberal  institutions.  But  I  refused 
any,  even  the  shghtest  assistance  from  that  party.  I  hurled 
the  indignation  of  my  mind  against  the  man  that  would  force 
the  children  of  France  to  be  educated  by  infidel  professors.  I 
am  not  entering  into  the  topic  farther  than  you  have  seen  by 
these  reports  of  my  antagonism  to  the  French  government. 

There  is  another  matter  in  my  life — my  opposition  to  the 
Chartists.  Recollect,  gentlemen,  that  when  the  Repeal  Asso- 
ciation was  in  full  force,  the  Chartists  were  in  insurrection  in 
England — that  they  were  entering  in  hundreds  and  thousands 
into  the  manufacturing  towns  of  England — recollect,  gentle- 
men, that  there  is  something  fascinating  to  all  the  poorer 
classes  m  Chartism.  Oh !  if  I  was  playing  the  hvpocrite, 
would  I  not  have  been  mitigated  in  my  tone  respecting  them? 
I  did  denounce  them.  I  kept  the  Irish  in  England  from  join- 
ing them.  The  very  moment  a  Chartist  subscribed  to  the 
funds  of  the  association  his  money  was  handed  back  to  him, 
and  his  name  struck  off  our  hst.  Now,  if  my  object  was  pop- 
ular insurrection,  good  Heaven !  would  not  any  man  in  my 
situation  have  wished  to  have  strength  ?  There  was  no  oath 
to  be  taken — no  danger  of  the  penalties  of  the  law — yet  I  dis- 
countenanced Chartism.  And,  my  lord,  I  do  firmly  declare, 
that  is  my  conscientious  conviction,  that  if  I  did  not  interfere. 
Chartism  would  have  spread  from  one  end  of  Ireland  to  the 
other.  Gentlemen  of  the  jury,  these  were  the  societies  I  suc- 
ceeded in  driving  from  Ireland,  and  I  am  to  be  charged  with 
a  conspiracy  for  this ! 

Another  point  to  which  I  will  call  your  attention  is  this — it 
has  been  my  constant  aim  to  pay  the  most  devoted  allegiance 
to  the  Queen  ;  you  have  it  in  evidence,  and  you  have  heard  it 
read  out  of  all  the  newspapers,  that  the  name  was  treated 
with  the  utmost  respect,  attention,  regard,  and  dehght,  in 
every  place,  by  the  Irish  people.  I  have  never  made  a  speech 
which  did  not  breathe  the  most  dutiful  and  affectionate  loyalty 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  219 

to  her  person,  crown,  and  dignity.  I  stand  here  and  repeat,  I 
never  made  a  disloyal  speech ;  I  always  made  a  difference  be- 
tween the  Queen  and  her  ministers,  and  the  Attorney-Greneral 
has  no  right  to  say  that  I  ever  uttered  one  particle  of  disloy- 
alty in  arraigning  the  speech  alluded  to.  "When  I  spoke,  I 
made  the  distinction  between  the  minister  and  the  sovereign, 
and  I  say  there  is  not  a  particle  or  taint  of  disloyalty  in  the 
observations  I  made.  I  answered  that  speech,  not  as  the 
speech  of  the  Queen,  but  of  the  minister  of  the  day,  and  I 
say  there  is  no  taint  of  disloyalty  in  it.  I  am  come  to  a  time 
of  life  when  she  can  do  nothing  for  me ;  and  yet  I  am  sure 
there  is  not  a  man  in  tho  court  who  could  infer  that  I  meant 
disloyalty. 

In  one  thing  I  think  the  Attorney-General  did  not  act  fairly 
to  me ;  and  it  does  afflict  me  that  I  should  be  charged  with 
disloyalty  to  the  sovereign  in  the  manner  as  he  has  sought  to 
fasten  it  on  me.  In  speaking  of  the  ministry,  the  word  Judy 
occurred,  and  then  the  Attorney-General  tells  you  I  called  the 
Queen  a  fishwoman.  That  speech  had  no  reference  to  the 
Queen  at  all — don't  beheve  it ;  I  feel  angry  at  it.  That  speech 
had  reference  to  the  minister  alone,  and  to  him  I  applied  the 
term  "  Judy,"  and  nothing  else,  and  it  is  utterly  false  that  I 
used  the  word  to  the  Queen ;  and  I  here  disclaim,  abjure,  and 
disavow  the  man  who  would  be  capable  of  using  such  language 
to  the  sovereign. 

No  matter  what  I  may  be  accused  of,  I  have  never  been 
accused  of  disloyalty  or  disaffection  to  my  sovereign,  and  I 
repeat  I  never  did  any  such  thing  as  the  Attorney-General  has 
stated  to  you.  When  I  did  use  strong  language,  I  have 
always  distinguished  between  the  Queen  and  her  ministers. 
Gentlemen,  I  fear  I  have  detained  you  rather  longer  on  this 
point  than  I  had  intended,  but  I  have  to  judge  of  my  case  by 
referring  you  to  my  public  conduct  which  is  fully  before  you. 
I  may  have  talents,  and  whatever  they  were  I  must  now  say, 
in  the  decUne  and  evening  of  my  hfe,  that  my  long  and  ardent 
desu-e  was  breathed  for  the  liberties  of  my  country. 

Gentlemen,  it  was  said  the  meetings,  when  they  took  place, 
had  some  object ;  so  they  had :  the  Repeal  of  the  Union.  Was 
that  a  bad  or  injurious  purpose  ?     I  dehberately  say  it  was 


220  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

not ;  no,  it  was  tlie  most  useful  tliat  could  possibly  be  liad  for 
the  benefit  of  this  country.  I  say  there  is  not  a  man  in  this 
court,  the  neutrahty  of  the  court  alone  excepted,  that  ought 
not  to  be  a  Repealer,  and  I  think  before  I  sit  down  I  will  make 
you  aU  Repealers.  I  wUl  show  it  is  your  duty  to  join  the  Re- 
peal cause,  and  then  I  am  sure  you  will  have  pleasure  in  doing 
so.  I  mean,  in  the  first  place,  to  show  you  the  destruction 
caused  in  this  country  by  the  English  parliament — that  it  had 
from  the  most  remote  period  watched  this  country  with  a  nar- 
row jealousy.  I  will  give  you  some  evidence  regarding  the 
woolen  manufacturers  of  this  country.  It  is  a  long  time  ago, 
and  occurred  in  the  reign  of  a  King  whose  actions  you  are  not 
inclined  to  condemn.  I  will  show  that  the  settlement  of  1782 
was  to  be  a  final  adjudication  and  establishment  of  the  Lish 
parliament  forever.  In  the  next  place,  I  will  show  you  the 
great  prosperity  of  Ireland  subsequent  to  that  period.  I  will 
r/jxt  show  you  that  the  Union  was  founded  in  the  grossest 
'i  justice  and  fraud — I  will  show  you  the  distress  that  followed 
ike  Union  statute — I  will  show  you  the  ill-treatment  of  Ire- 
land by  England,  which  is  a  matter  of  history  so  well  known, 
that  I  will  not  detain  you  on  the  point.  Yet,  being  brought 
here  by  the  Attorney-General,  my  defence  is,  that  I  am  not 
looking  for  what  is  injurious  to  the  country,  but  for  what 
would  be  of  the  greatest  possible  benefit  to  this  country.  I 
have  a  right  to  this  ;  for  I  have  represented  the  county  of 
Clare,  with  250,000  inhabitants ;  I  have  represented  "Waterford, 
with  300,000  inhabitants ;  I  have  represented  Kerry  with 
260,000  inhabitants ;  I  have  represented  Meath  with  300,000 
inhabitants ;  and  I  now  stand  here,  the  proud  representative 
of  the  county  of  Cork,  with  her  730,000  inhabitants;  and  I 
feel  it  a  duty  I  owe  to  the  country,  to  state  that  I  am  seeking 
what  will  benefit  her  inhabitants.  I  twice  represented  the 
city  of  Dubhn,  and  I  feel  gratitude  to  the  Irish  people  for  the 
confidence  reposed  in  me,  and  I  here  stand  up  to  demand  for 
her  just  rights  and  privileges.  I  first,  propose  to  show  the 
misgovernnient  of  Ireland  by  England,  and  I  will  do  so  from 
a  French  author.  He  was  a  historian,  and  one  of  the  literati 
of  France,  and  I  wiU  give  you  his  description.     Hear  what  he 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  221 

says.     It  is  from  Thierry's  History  of  the  Conquest  of  Eng- 
land by  the  Normans,  3d  vol.,  p.  430  : 

"The  conquest  of  Ireland  by  the  Anglo-Normans  is  perhaps  the  only 
one  which  has  not  been  followed  by  gradual  amelioration  in  the  condition 
of  the  conquered  i^eople.  In  England  the  descendants  of  the  Anglo-Sax- 
ons, though  unable  to  free  themselves  from  the  dominion  of  the  con- 
queror, advanced  rapidly  in  prosperity  and  ci\'ilization.  But  the  native 
Irish,  apparently  placed  in  similar  circumstances,  have  for  five  centuries 
exhibited  a  state  of  uniform  decline.  And  yet  this  j)eople  are  endowed 
by  nature  with  great  quickness  of  parts,  and  a  remarkable  aptitude  for 
every  description  of  intellectual  labor.  The  soil  of  Ireland  is  fertile  and 
adapted  to  cultivation  ;  yet  its  fertihty  has  been  equally  unprofitable  to 
the  conquerors  and  the  conquered,  and  the  descendants  of  the  Norman, 
notwithstanding  the  extent  of  their  possessions,  have  become  gradually 
as  impoverished  as  the  Irish  themselves.  This  singular  destiny,  which 
presses  with  equal  weight  upon  the  ancient  inhabitants  and  the  more  re- 
cent settlers  of  Ireland,  is  the  consequence  of  their  proximity  to  Eng- 
land, and  of  the  influence  which,  ever  since  the  Conquest,  the  govern- 
ment of  the  latter  country  has  constantly  exercised  over  the  internal  affairs 
of  the  former." 

There  is  a  disinterested  and  impartial  history  giving  you 
this  melancholy  picture  of  the  state  of  things,  and  you  see  it 
is  all  owing  to  the  baneful  influence  of  the  English  govern- 
ment on  this  country.  The  next  authority  which  I  shall  quote 
is  not  one  that  would  be  found  in  the  same  ranks  with  the 
last — it  is  Mr.  Pitt.  In  speaking  of  the  commercial  proposi- 
tions of  1785, 1  find  he  says  : 

"The  uniform  policy  of  England  had  been  to  deprive  Ireland  of  the 
use  of  her  own  resources,  and  to  make  her  subservient  to  the  interests 
and  the  opulence  of  the  English  people." 

That  is  not  my  language,  gentlemen  ;  they  are  the  words  of 
Pitt,  avowing  that  the  pohcy  of  England  had  always  been  to 
use  Ireland  for  her  own  purposes.  I  will  read  another  author- 
ity of  more  consideration  with  you — it  is  that  of  the  Lord 
Chief  Justice  Bushe,  dehvered  in  parhament  in  1799  : 

"  You  are  called  upon  to  give  up  your  independence,  and  to  whom  are 
you  called  upon  to  give  it  up  ?  To  a  nation  which  for  six  hundred 
years  has  treated  you  with  uniform  injustice  and  oppression." 

These,  recollect,  are  the  words  of  Lord  Chief  Justice  Bushe, 
and  not  mine. 


222  SELECT  SPEECHES  OP  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

"  The  treasury  bench  startles  at  the  assertion — non  mens  hie  sermo  est. 
If  the  treasury  bench  scold  me,  Mr.  Pitt  will  scold  them — it  is  the  asser- 
tion in  so  many  words  in  his  speech.  Ireland,  says  he,  has  always  been 
treated  with  injustice  and  ilhberahty.  Ireland,  says  Junius,  has  been 
uniformly  plundered  and  oppressed.  This  is  not  the  slander  of  Junius, 
nor  the  candor  of  Pitt — it  is  history.  For  centuries  has  the  British  par- 
liament and  nation  kept  you  down,  shackled  your  commerce,  and  par* 
lyzed  your  exertions  :  despised  your  characters,  and  ridiculed  your  pre- 
tensions to  any  privileges,  commercial  or  constitutional.  She  has  never 
conceded  a  point  to  you  which  she  could  avoid,  or  granted  a  favor  which 
was  not  reluctantly  distilled.  They  have  been  aU  wrung  from  her  like 
drops  of  her  blood." 

The  words  are  not  mine,  gentlemen. 

"And  you  are  not  in  possession  of  a  single  blessing  (except  those 
which  you  derive  from  God)  that  has  not  been  either  purchased  or  ex- 
torted by  the  virtue  of  your  own  parUament  from  the  ilUberality  of  Eng- 
land." 

In  1798,  when  a  government  pamphlet  was  pubHshed  by 
Mr.  Secretary  Cooke,  which  first  broached  the  subject  of  the 
Repeal  of  the  Union,  he  says  : 

"  A  Union  was  the  only  means  of  preventing  Ireland  from  growing  too 
great  and  too  powerful."  At  the  same  time  admitting — "When  one  na- 
tion is  coerced  to  unite  with  another,  such  imion  savors  of  subjection." 

I  will  quote  agaiu  from  Lord  Chief  Justice  Bushe  : 

"  In  denouncing  England's  intolerance  of  Ireland's  pros]»erity,  during 
the  debates  on  the  Union,  he  used  the  following  language  :  "I  strip 
this  formidable  measure  of  all  its  pretensions  and  all  its  aggravations  :  I 
look  on  it  nakedly  and  abstractedly,  and  I  see  nothing  in  it  but  one 
question — ^wiU  you  give  up  the  country  ?  I  forget  for  a  moment  the  un- 
principled means  by  Avliich  it  has  been  promoted — I  pass  by  for  a  moment 
the  unseasonable  time  at  which  it  has  been  introduced,  and  the  contempt 
of  parhament  upon  which  it  is  bottomed,  and  I  look  upon  it  simply  as  Eng- 
land reclaiming,  in  a  moment  of  your  weakness,  that  dominion  which  you 
extorted  from  her  in  a  moment  of  your  virtue — a  dominion  which  she  uni- 
formly abused — which  invariably  oppressed  and  impoverished  you,  and 
from  the  cessation  of  which  you  date  all  your  prosperity.  It  is  a  measure 
which  goes  to  degrade  the  country,  by  saying  it  is  unfit  to  govern  herself, 
and  to  stultify  the  parUament  by  saying  it  is  incapable  of  governing  the 
country.  It  is  the  revival  of  the  odious  and  absurd  title  of  conquest;  it  is 
the  renewal  of  the  abominable  distinction  between  mother  country  and 
colony  which  lost  America  ;  it  is  the  denial  of  the  rights  of  nature  to 
a  great  nation  from  an  intolerance  of  its  prosperity. " 


I 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  223 

From  the  commencement  I  told  you  I  would  prove  that  it 
was  hatred  of  the  prosperity  of  Ireland ;  and  if  he  who  ut- 
tered that  opinion  were  here  to-day,  he  would  avow  it.  These 
topics  were  almost  forgotten,  and  I  am  obliged  to  the  Attorney- 
General  for  having  reminded  me  of  them.  I  will  read  another 
document  to  prove  that  the  English  policy  has  always  been 
against  the  amalgamation  of  the  Irish  people.  It  is  an  extract 
from  a  letter  from  Primate  Boulter  to  the  Duke  of  Newcastle, 

which  is  dated  Dublin,  January  9th,  1724  : 

• 

"  I  have  made  it  my  business  to  talk  •with  several  of  the  most  leading 
men  in  parliament,  and  have  employed  others  to  pick  up  what  they  could 
learn  from  a  variety  of  people  :  and  I  feel  by  my  own  and  others' 
inquiry  that  the  people  of  eveiy  religion,  country,  and  party  heie,  are 
alike  set  against  Wood's  halfpence,  and  that  their  agreement  in  this  has 
had  a  very  unhappy  influence  on  the  state  of  this  nation,  by  bringing 
on  intimacies  between  Papists  and  Jacobites  and  the  Whigs  who  before 
had  no  correspondence  with  them  ;  so  'tis  questioned  whether  (if  there 
were  occasion)  the  justice  of  the  peace  could  be  found  who  would  be 
strict  in  disarming  the  Papists." 

Mark,  gentlemen,  the  paternal  feeHng  of  the  government  of 
that  day.  "  It  spurned,  as  an  '  unhappy  influence,'  the  intima- 
cy between  the  Papists  and  Whigs."  Gentlemen,  have  I  not 
now  proved  what  I  said — ^by  the  authority  of  Thierry,  of  Pitt, 
of  Bushe,  and  of  Primate  Boulter  ?  And  I  conjure  you  to  re- 
member that  opinion  of  Bushe — that  the  oppression  of  Ire- 
land arose  from  an  intolerance  of  her  prosperity.  And  he  ut- 
tered that  sentiment  uncontradicted.  I  will  next  bring  your 
attention  to  the  transactions  of  1782 — that  period  which  must 
be  famihar  to  your  recollections — the  one  bright  spot — the  one 
green  oasis  in  the  desert  surrounding  it.  The  transactions  of 
1782  were  of  consummate  advantage  to  England.  She  was  then 
assailed  upon  every  side,  America  had  first  rebelled,  and 
afterward  separated  from  her.  She  wanted  Ireland.  Being 
without  troops  to  garrison  her  citadels  and  secure  her  safety, 
the  gentlemen  of  Ireland  armed.  But  did  they  think  of  sepa- 
ration ?  No  ;  they  asserted  their  right  to  an  independent  leg- 
islature and  free  trade,  and  they  obtained  both,  for  it  was  not 
safe  to  refuse  them.  The  adjustment  which  then  took  place 
between  the  two  countries  was  declared  to  be  a  final  one.    The 


224  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

Englisli  House  of  Lords  said  so,  tlie  Commons  said  the  same, 
the  Lord  Lieutenant  of  Ireland  announced  it,  and  the  two 
British  houses  of  parhament  declared  it  was  a  final  adjust- 
ment. And  how  was  it  got  rid  of  ?  I  will  show  you.  [Mr. 
O'Connell  read  the  document.] 

Such  were  the  principles  in  which  that  great  settlement  was 
brought  about ;  and  do  you  know,  or  did  you  know  in  your 
lives  a  single  individual  who  was  a  Volunteer  in  1782  that  to 
the  last  moment  of  his  life  did  not  boast  of  ha\dng  participat- 
ed in  that  mighty  and  most  salutary  change  ?  It  was  glorious 
to  Ireland  to  preserve  their  allegiance,  and  join  it  with  liberty — ■ 
to  ascertain  constitutional  rights,  and  obtain  legislative  inde- 
pendence. The  connexion  with  England  was  stronger — the 
connexion  was  never  disputed,  but  proclaimed  by  the  patriots 
of  that  day,  and  the  connexion  was  preserved  by  that  measure. 

I  am  asked  whether  I  have  proved  that  the  prophecy  of  Mr. 
Fox  was  reahzed,  that  the  prosperity  that  was  promised  to 
Ireland  was  actually  gained  by  reason  of  her  legislative  inde- 
pendence. Now,  pray  listen  to  me.  I  will  tell  you  the  evi- 
dence by  which  I  shall  demonstrate  this  fact.  It  is  curious 
that  the  first  of  them  is  from  Mr.  Pitt,  again,  in  the  speech  he 
made  in  1799,  in  favor  of  the  resolutions  for  carrying  the 
Union.  If  he  could  have  shown  that  Ireland  was  in  distress 
and  destitution — that  her  commerce  was  lessened — that  her 
manufactures  were  diminished — that  she  was  in  a  state  of  suf- 
fering and  want,  by  reason  of,  or  during  the  legislative  inde- 
pendence of  the  country — of  course  he  would  have  made  it  his 
topic  in  support  of  his  case,  to  show  that  separate  legislatures 
had  worked  badly,  and  produced  calamities  and  not  blessings  ; 
but  the  fact  was  too  powerful  for  him.  But  his  vicious  inge- 
nuity availed  itseK  of  the  fact,  which  fact  he  admitted ;  and 
let  us  see  how  he  admitted  it.  He  admitted  the  prosperity  of 
Ireland  ;  there  was  his  reasoning.  Now  mark  it — "  As  Ire- 
land," he  said,  "  was  so  prosperous  under  her  own  parliament, 
we  can  calculate  that  the  amount  of  that  prosperity  will  be 
treble  under  a  British  legislature."  He  first  quoted  a  speech 
of  Mr.  Foster's  in  1785,  in  these  words — "  The  exportation  of 
Irish  produce  to  England  amounts  to  two  millions  and  a  half 
annually,  and  the  exportation  of  British  produce  to  Ireland 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  225 

amounts  to  one  million.".  Instead  of  saying  you  are  in  want 
and  destitution,  unite  with  England,  and  you  wiU  be  prosper- 
ous— iie  was  driven  to  admit  this.  Ireland  is  prosperous 
now  with  her  own  parhament,  but  it  will  be  trebly  prosperous 
when  you  give  up  that  parhament,  or  have  it  joined  with  the 
parhament  of  England.  So  absurd  a  proposition  was  never 
uttered ;  but  it  shows  this,  how  completely  forced  he  was  to 
admit  Irish  prosperity,  when  no  other  argument  was  left  in 
his  power,  but  the  absurd  observation  I  have  read  to  you.  He 
gives  another  quotation  from  Foster,  in  which  it  is  said  : 

"Britain  imports  annually  £2,500,000  of  our  products,  all,  or  very 
nearly  all,  duty  free,  and  we  import  almost  a  million  of  hers,  and  raise  a 
revenue  on  almost  every  article  of  it." 

This  relates  to  the  year  1785.    Pitt  goes  on  to  say : 

"But  how  stands  the  case  now  [1799]  ?  The  trade  at  this  time  is 
infinitely  more  advantageous  to  Ireland.  It  wiU  be  proved  from  the 
documents  I  hold  in  my  hand,  as  far  as  relates  to  the  mere  interchange 
of  manufactures,  that  the  manufactures  exported  to  Ireland  from  Great 
Britain,  in  1797,  very  little  exceeded  one  million  sterUng  (the  articles  of 
produce  amount  to  nearly  the  same  sum)  ;  whilst  Great  Britain,  on  the 
other  hand,  imported  from  Ireland  to  the  amount  of  more  than  three 
millions  in  the  manufacture  of  linen  and  linen  yarn,  and  between  two 
and  three  millions  in  provision  and  cattle,  besides  com  and  other  articles 
of  produce." 

That,  said  Mr.  Pitt,  was  in  1785 — three  years  after  her  legis- 
lative independence — that  was  the  state  of  Ireland.  Have  you 
heard,  gentlemen,  that  picture,  that  description  ?  You  have 
heard  that  proof  of  the  prosperity  of  Ireland.  She  then  im- 
ported little  more  than  one  million's  worth  of  Enghsh  manu- 
facture; she  exported  two  and  a  half  miUions  of  linen  and 
hnen  yarn,  and  adding  to  that  the  million  of  other  exports, 
there  is  a  picture  given  of  her  internal  prosperity.  Becollect 
that  we  now  import  largely  English  manufactures,  and  that 
the  greatest  part  of  the  price  of  those  manufactures  consists 
of  the  wages  which  the  manufacturer  gives  to  the  persons  who 
manufacture  them.  Two  million  five  hundred  thousand  worth 
of  hnen  and  yarn  were  exported,  and  one  miUion  of  other 
goods.  Compare  that  with  the  present  state  of  things.  Does 
not  every  one  of  you  know  that  there  is  scarcely  anything  now 


226  SELECT    SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

manufactured  in  Ireland — that  nearly  all  the  manufactures 
used  in  Ireland  are  imported  from  England  ?  I  am  now  show- 
ing the  state  of  Irish  prosperity  at  the  time  I  am  talking  of. 
I  gave  you  the  authority  of  Forster  (no  small  one)  and  of  Pitt, 
of  Irish  prosperity  during  that  time.  I  will  give  you  the  au- 
thority of  another  man,  that  was  not  very  friendly  to  the  peo- 
ple of  this  country — that  of  Lord  Clare.  Lord  Clare  made  a 
speech  in  1798,  which  he  subsequently  published,  and  in  which 
I  find  this  remarkable  passage,  to  which  I  beg  leave  to  direct 
your  particular  attention  :  "  There  is  not,"  said  his  lordship,  "  a 
nation  on  the  face  of  the  habitable  globe,  which  has  advanced 
in  civiHzation,  in  agriculture,  in  manufactures,  with  the  same 
rapidity,  in  the  same  period,  as  Ireland"  (viz.,  from  1782  to 
1798).  That  was  the  way  in  which  Irish  legislative  indepen- 
dence worked,  and  I  have  in  support  of  it  the  evidence  of  Pitt, 
Foster,  and  Lord  Clare :  and  Lord  Grey,  in  1799,  talking  of 
Scotland  in  the  same  years,  says : 

"  In  truth,  for  a  period  of  more  than  forty  years  after  the  (Scotch) 
Union,  Scotland  exhibited  no  proofs  of  increased  industry  and  rising 
wealth." 

Lord  Grey,  in  continuation,  stated  that — 

"Till  after  1748,  there  was  uo  sensible  advance  of  the  commerce  of 
Scotland.  Several  of  her  manufactures  were  not  established  till  60  yeai-s 
after  the  Union,  and  her  principal  branch  of  manufacture  was  not  set 
up,  I  believe,  till  1781.  The  abolition  of  the  heritable  jurisdictions  was 
the  first  great  measure  that  gave  an  impulse  to  the  spirit  of  improvement 
in  Scotland.  Since  that  time  the  prosperity  of  Scotland  has  been  con- 
siderable, but  certainly  not  so  great  as  that  of  Ireland  has  been  within 
the  same  period." 

Lord  Plunket,  in  his  speech  in  1799,  in  one  of  his  happiest 
efforts  of  oratory,  speaks  of  her  as 

'a  little  island  with  a  population  of  four  or  five  millions  of  peo- 
ple, hardy,  gallant,  and  enthusiastic — possessed  of  all  the  means  of  civili- 
zation, agriculture,  and  commerce,  well  pursued  and  understood  ;  a  con- 
stitution fully  recognized  and  established  ;  her  revenues,  her  trade,  her 
manufactures  thriving  beyond  the  hope  or  the  example  of  any  other 
country  of  her  extent — within  these  few  years  advancing  with  a  rajjidity 
astonishing  even  to  herself ;  not  complaining  of  deficiency  in  these  res- 
pects, but  enjoying  and  acknowledging  her  prosperity.     She  is  called  on 


SPEECH  IN  HIS   OWN  DEFENCE.  227 

to  surrender  them  all  to  the  cootrol  of — whom  ?  Is  it  to  a  gi-eat  and 
powerful  continent,  to  whom  nature  intended  her  as  an  appendage — to  a 
mighty  people,  totally  exceeding  her  in  all  calculation  of  territory  or 
population  ?  No  !  but  to  another  happy  httle  island,  placed  beside  her 
in  the  bosom  of  the  Atlantic,  of  Httle  more  than  double  her  territoi-y 
and  population,  and  possessing  resources  not  nearly  so  superior  to  her 
wants." 

Here  is  the  evidence  of  its  failure  as  regards  advantages  to 
Ireland,  and  the  benefit  to  be  derived  from  Irish  legislative 
independence  : 

"  Such  is  the  right  honorable  gentleman's  (Mr.  Pitt's)  infelicity  upon 
this  great  question,  that  the  measure  which  was  to  be  the  remedy  becomes 
the  source  of  all  distempers.  Instead  of  quieting,  he  has  agitated  every 
heart  in  that  country.  The  epoch  from  which  Avas  to  begin  the  reign 
of  comfort  and  confidence,  of  peace,  and  equity,  and  justice,  is  marked, 
even  on  its  outset,  by  the  establishment  of  that  which  rests  every  civil 
blessing  on  the  caprice  of  power.  Ill-starred  race  !  to  whom  this  vaunted 
Union  was  to  be  the  harbinger  of  all  happiness,  and  of  which  the  first 
fruit  is  martial  law — or  in  other  words,  the  extinguishment  of  all  law 
whatsoever." 

Advantages  to  be  expected  from  the  independence  of  Ireland. 

17th  May,  1782. 
"  He  desired  gentlemen  to  look  forward  to  that  happy  period  when 
Ireland  should  experience  the  blessings  that  attend  freedom  of  trade 
and  constitution  ;  when  by  the  richness  and  fertihty  of  her  soil,  the  in- 
dustry of  her  manufactures,  and  the  increase  of  her  population  she 
should  become  a  powerful  country  ;  then  might  England  look  for  power- 
ful assistance  in  seamen  to  man  her  fleets,  and  soldiers  to  fight  her  bat- 
tles. England  renouncing  all  right  to  legislate  for  Ireland,  the  latter 
would  most  cordially  support  the  former  as  a  friend  whom  she  loved. 
If  this  country,  on  the  other  hand,  was  to  assume  the  power  of  making 
laws  for  Ireland,  she  must  only  make  an  enemy  instead  of  a  friend,  for 
where  there  was  not  a  community  of  interests,  there  the  party  whose 
interests  were  sacrificed  became  an  enemy." — 2  vol.  p.  60. 

Lord  Chief  Justice. — I  beg  yom:  pardon,  Mr.  O'Connell, 
I  am  not  able  to  bear  the  heat  of  the  court.  I  would  be  sorry 
to  incommode  you,  but  it  will  be  necessary  to  open  one  of  the 
windows. 

Mr.  O'Connell. — Not  at  all,  my  lord.  I  will  return  in  a 
moment. 


228  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

Mr.  O'Connell  having  been  permitted  to  witlidraw  for  a 
short  time,  the  court  and  jury  retired  for  refreshment. 

The  court  having  resumed,  Mr.  O'Connell  thus  proceeded : 
When  the  adjournment  took  place  I  was  in  the  act  of  reading 
to  you  several  authorities  showing  how  much  Ireland  pros- 
pered under  her  own  independent  parliament.  I  will  now 
direct  your  attention  to  such  documents  as  will  tend  to  cor- 
roborate the  facts  contained  in  those  I  have  already  adverted 
to.  You  have  heard  that  in  1810  a  meeting  was  held  in  Dub- 
lin to  petition  the  legislature  for  a  Eepeal  of  the  Union.  I 
will  read  an  unconnected  passage  from  a  speech  delivered  by  a 
gentleman  belonging  to  a  most  respectable  house  in  this  city. 
It  is  as  foUows  : 

"Some  of  us,"  said  he,  "remember  this  country  as  she  was  before  we 
recovered  and  brought  back  our  constitution  in  the  year  1782.  We  are 
reminded  of  it  by  the  jaresent  period.  Then  as  now,  our  merchants  were 
without  trade,  our  shopkeepers  without  customers,  our  workmen  without 
employment ;  then  as  now,  it  became  the  universal  feeling  that  nothing 
but  the  recovery  of  our  rights  could  save  us.  Our  rights  were  recovered  ; 
and  how  soon  afterwards,  indeed  as  if  by  magic,  plenty  smiled  on  us, 
and  we  soon  became  prosperous  and  happy." 

Let  me  next  adduce  the  testimony  of  a  class  of  citizens 
who,  from  their  position,  and  the  nature  of  their  avocations, 
were  well  calculated  to  supply  important  evidence  on  the  state 
of  Ireland,  subsequent  to  the  glorious  achievements  of  1782. 
The  bankers  of  DubHn  held  a  meeting  on  the  18th  of  Decem- 
ber, 1798,  at  which  they  passed  the  following  resolutions : 

"Resolved — That  since  the  renunciation  of  the  power  of  Great  Britain, 
in  1782,  to  legislate  for  Ireland,  the  commerce  and  prosperity  of  this 
kingdom  have  eminently  increased. 

"  Resolved — That  we  attribute  these  blessings,  under  Providence,  to  the 
wisdom  of  the  Irish  parhament." 

The  Guild  of  Merchants  met  on  the  14th  of  January,  1799, 
and  passed  a  resolution  declaring : 

"That  the  commerce  of  Ireland  has  increased  and  her  manufactures 
improved  beyond  example,  since  the  independence  of  this  kingdom  was 
restored  by  the  exertions  of  our  countrymen  in  1782. 

"  Resolved — That  we  look  with  abhorrence  on  any  attempt  to  deprive 
the  people  of  Ireland  of  their  parliament,  and  thereby  of  their  consti- 
tutional right  and  immediate  power  to  legislate  for  themselves." 


\ 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  229 

I  have  in  addition  to  these,  from  the  most  unquestionable 
authority  (an  authority  incapable  of  deceiving  or  of  being  de- 
ceived), the  relative  increase  in  England  and  Ireland  of  the 
consumption  of  tea,  tobacco,  wine,  sugar,  and  coffee,  from  1785 
to  the  Union,  which  is  as  follows  : 

Tea. — Increase  in  Ireland,  84  per  cent ;  increase  in  England,  45  per 
cent. 

From  1786  to  the  Union  :  Tobacco. — Increase  in  Ireland,  100  per  cent ; 
increase  in  England,  64  per  cent. 

From  1787  to  the  Union  :  Wine. — Increase  in  Ireland,  74  per  cent ; 
increase  in  England,  22  per  cent. 

From  1785  to  the  Union  :  Sugar. — Increase  in  Ireland,  57  per  cent ; 
increase  in  England,  53  per  cent. 

Coffee. — Increase  in  Ireland,  600  per  cent ;  increase  in  England,  75  per 
cent. 

I  could  multiply  quotations.  What  need  have  I  for  so  do- 
ing ?  I  have  proved  that  no  country  on  the  face  of  the  earth 
ever  increased  so  rapidly  in  prosperity,  as  Ireland  did  from 
1782  to  the  Union.  There  is  a  cant  phrase  used  for  want  of 
argument  against  us  Repealers — "  you  wish  for  dismember- 
ment of  the  empire."  Reflect  for  one  moment  on  the  absurdity 
of  saying  this.  Ireland,  under  her  own  parliament,  with  her 
own  legislature,  increased  in  prosperity  to  the  incalculable  ex- 
tent I  have  shown.  Is  it  possible  to  beheve  that  that  increase 
in  prosperity  would  have  had  the  least  tendency  to  the  dismem- 
berment of  the  empire,  or  separation  from  England  ?  She 
was  increasing  in  prosperity  during  the  connexion — she  was 
increasing  in  prosperity  during  that  period  of  legislative  inde- 
pendence— why  should  she,  then,  think  of  dismemberment  ? 
I  can  understand  the  term  as  applied  to  a  period  in  which 
trade  was  declining — in  which  the  consumption  of  the  articles 
I  have  mentioned  greatly  diminished — I  can  understand  the 
term  dismemberment,  as  applied  to  poverty  and  destitution, 
but  it  is  absurd  to  talk  about  dismemberment,  as  apphcable  to 
a  period  when  there  was  an  increase  in  prosperity,  such  as 
Ireland  experienced  under  her  own  parHament  again. 

Is  it  not  melancholy  to  think  that  such  an  opening  scene 
as  that  to  which  I  have  dfrected  your  attention  should  be 
closed   at   once?     It  really  afflicts  me  to  reflect  that  there 


230  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  o'CONNELL. 

should  have  existed — should  I  call  him  a  monster — to  disturb 
such  increasing  prosperity,  to  gain  dominion,  and  actually,  to 
use  the  words  of  Charles  K.  Bushe,  "  invoice  the  prosperity 
of  Ireland."  At  the  time  when  the  great  change  took  place 
the  governing  principle  was  anything  but  what  it  should  be. 
The  state  Enghsh  debt  was  considerably  increased — the  des- 
truction of  the  Irish  parliament,  and  the  means  used  to  effect 
that  destruction,  were  certainly  those  suited  to  the  nature  of 
so  deleterious  an  object.  You  will  find  that  aU  that  the  worst 
passions  could  effectuate  was  arranged,  in  order  to  effect  the 
destruction  of  Ireland. 

The  Attorney-General  has  referred  you  to  the  report  of  the 
select  committee  of  the  House  of  Commons  in  1797.  I  will 
refer  you  to  that  of  1798.  There  I  find  that  that  which  was 
stated  by  Lord  Plunket  as  to  the  fomenting  of  the  rebellion 
until  it  should  come  to  such  a  pitch  that  it  might  suddenly 
explode  was  the  great  means  of  bringing  the  bad  passions  of 
Ireland  in  play.  It  appears  by  that  report  that  there  was  a 
person  of  the  name  of  M'Guane,  who  was  a  colonel  in  the 
United  Irishmen.  He  transmitted  to  government  all  meetings 
of  the  colonels,  and  of  the  country  and  provincial  rebel  com- 
mittees, from  April,  1797,  till  May,  1798.  These  communica- 
tions were  made  through  Mr.  Clellann,  land  agent  to  Lord  Lon- 
donderry. But  while  on  this  point  I  wiU  du-ect  your  attention 
to  another  fact.     In  the  Life  of  Grattan,  vol.  2,  p.  145  : 

"  Shortly  before  his  death  Lord  Clonmel  sent  for  his  nephew,  Dean 
Scott,  got  him  to  examine  his  papers,  and  destroy  those  -which  were  use- 
less. There  were  many  relating  to  pohtics  that  disclosed  the  conduct  of 
the  Irish  government  at  the  period  of  the  disturbances  in  1798.  There 
was  one  letter  in  particular  which  showed  their  dupUcity,  and  that  they 
might  have  crushed  the  rebellion  ;  but  that  they  let  it  go  on,  on  pur- 
pose, to  cany  the  Union,  and  that  this  was  their  design.  When  Lord 
Clonmel  was  dying,  he  stated  this  to  Dean  Scott,  and  made  him  destroy 
the  letter  ;  he  further  added  that  he  had  gone  to  the  Lord  Lieutenant, 
and  told  him  that  as  they  knew  of  the  proceedings  of  the  disaflfected,  it 
•was  wrong  to  permit  them  to  go  on  ;  that  the  government,  having  it  in 
their  power,  should  crush  them  at  once,  and  prevent  the  insurrection. 
He  was  coldly  received,  and  found  that  his  advice  was  not  rehshed." 

So  hero  you  have  that  which  necessarily  followed  from  not 
acting  on  the  communication  of  M'Guane,  and  the  fomenting 


i 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  231 

of  tlie  rebellion  for  the  purpose  of  carrying  the  Union.  The 
entire  country  were  against  the  measure,  but  they  were  con- 
trolled and  checked  by  mihtary  power.     Lord  Plunket  says  : 

"  I  accuse  tlie  government  of  fomenting  tlie  embers  of  a  lingering  re- 
bellion ;  of  hallooing  the  Protestant  against  the  Catholic,  and  the  Catholic 
against  the  Protestant ;  of  artfully  keeping  aUve  domestic  dissensions 
for  the  purposes  of  subjugation." 

I  will  now  read  a  passage  from  a  speech  made  by  Lord 
Grey,  in  the  year  1800,  on  the  repugnance  of  the  Irish  nation 
to  the  Union  : 

"  Twenty-seven  counties  have  petitioned  against  the  measure.  The  pe- 
tition from  the  county  of  Down  is  signed  by  upward  of  17,000  respect- 
able independent  men,  and  all  the  others  are  in  a  similar  proportion. 
Dublin  petitioned  under  the  great  seal  of  the  city,  and  each  of  the  cor- 
porations in  it  followed  the  example.  Drogheda  petitioned  against  the 
Union  ;  and  almost  every  town  in  the  kingdom,  in  hke  manner,  testified 
its  disapprobation.  Those  in  favor  of  the  measure  professing  great  in- 
fluence ia  the  country,  obtained  a  few  counter  petitions.  Yet,  though 
the  petition  from  the  county  Down  was  signed  by  17,000,  the  counter 
petition  was  signed  only  by  415.  Though  there  were  707,000  who  had 
signed  petitions  against  the  measure,  the  total  number  of  those  who 
declared  themselves  in  favor  of  it  did  not  exceed  3,000,  and  many  of 
these  only  prayed  that  the  measure  might  be  discussed.  If  the  facts 
I  state  are  true  (and  I  challenge  any  man  to  falsify  them,)  could  a  na- 
tion in  more  direct  terms  express  its  disappi'obation  of  a  pohtical  measure 
than  Ireland  has  done  of  a  legislative  Union  with  Great  Britain  ?  In 
fact,  the  nation  is  nearly  unanimous,  and  this  great  majority  is  composed, 
not  of  bigots,  fanatics,  or  jacobins,  but  of  the  most  respectable  of  every 
class  in  the  community." 

Mr.  Bushe  says : 

"The  basest  corruption  and  artifice  were  excited  to  promote  the 
Union.  All  the  worst  passions  of  the  human  heart  were  entered  in  the 
service,  and  all  the  most  depraved  ingenuity  of  the  human  intellect 
tortured  to  devise  new  contrivances  for  fraud. 

"  Half  a  million  or  more  were  expended  some  years  since  to  break  an 
opposition — the  same,  or  greater  sum,  may  be  necessary  now  ;  "  [and 
Grattan  added]  "  that  Lord  Castlereagh  had  said  so  in  the  most  exten- 
sive sense  of  bribeiy  and  corruption.  The  threat  was  proceeded  on — 
the  peerage  sold — the  caitiffs  of  corruption  were  everywhere — in  the 
lobby,  in  the  streets,  on  the  steps,  and  at  the  door  of  every  parliamentary 
leader,  offering  titles  to  some,  oflices  to  others,  corruption  to  all." 


232  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'COXNELL. 

Let  me  now  request  your  attention  to  a  description  given  by 
Plunket  of  the  mode  in  which  the  Union  was  carried  : 

"  I  will  be  bold  to  say  that  licentious  and  impious  France,  in  all  the 
■ttnrestrained  excesses  which  anarchy  and  atheism  have  given  birth  to, 
has  not  committed  a  more  insidious  act  against  her  enemy  than  is  now 
attempted  by  the  professed  champion  of  the  cause  of  civihzed  Europe 
against  a  friend  and  ally  in  the  hour  of  her  calamity  and  distress — at  a 
moment  when  our  country  is  filled  with  British  troops,  when  the  loyal 
men  of  Ireland  are  fatigued  and  exhausted  by  their  efforts  to  subdue  the 
rebeUion — efforts  in  which  they  had  succeeded  before  those  trooj^s  ar- 
rived— while  the  habeas  corpus  act  was  suspended — while  trials  by  coiu't- 
maxtial  are  carrying  on  in  many  parts  of  the  kingdom — while  the  peojjle 
are  taught  to  think  they  have  no  right  to  meet  or  to  dehberate — and 
while  the  great  body  of  them  are  so  palsied  by  theu*  fears  or  worn  down 
by  their  exertions,  that  even  the  vital  question  is  scarcely  able  to  rouse 
them  from  their  lethargy — in  a  moment  when  we  are  distracted  by  do- 
mestic dissensions — dissensions  artfully  kept  ahve  as  the  pretext  of  our 
present  subjugation,  and  the  instrument  of  our  future  thralldom." 

Such,  gentlemen,  is  the  description  given  of  the  means  by 
which  the  Union  was  carried.  You  know  how  much  money 
was  spent  in  the  pm'chase  of  rotten  boroughs.  You  know 
that  three  millions  w^ere  expended  in  the  actual  payment  of 
persons  who  voted  for  the  Union.  You  know  that  there  was 
no  office  in  the  state,  no  office  from  the  highest  in  the  church 
to  the  lowest  in  the  constabulary,  that  was  not  used  to  gain 
the  desired  purpose.  There  was  more  fraud,  corruption,  and 
iniquity  employed  in  the  carrying  of  the  Union,  than  perhaps 
ever  accompanied  any  pubhc  transaction.  You  will  easily 
imagine  the  result.  The  Union  has  been  destructive  to  Ire- 
land ;  you  feel  this  yourselves ;  you  see  it  by  the  state  of  your 
streets  ;  you  know  it  by  the  position  of  your  commerce.  Hav- 
ing shown  you  the  general  spirit  of  the  Enghsh  government 
— having  adverted  to  the  finahty  as  intended  by  the  treaty  of 
1782 — having  shown  you  the  extreme  advantages  and  pros- 
perity of  Ireland  from  the  independence  of  her  own  parhament 
— having  shown  you  the  means  by  which  the  Union  was  car- 
ried, I  come  now  to  detain  you  for  as  short  a  time  as  possible 
by  a  reference  to  the  evil  results  of  that  measure.  In  the  year 
1794  the  Irish  debt  was  only  seven  millions ;  in  the  year  1798 
it  had  increased  to  fourteen  millions.      At  the  last-named 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  233 

period,  tlie  English  debt  was,  at  least,  £350,000,000.  At  the 
time  of  the  Union,  Ireland  owed  21  millions — England  446 
millions.  What  were  the  terms  of  the  Union?  They  were 
these — that  England  was  to  bear  forever  the  burden  of  these 
446  millions,  and  consequently,  for  its  interest  and  charge,  the 
burden  of  a  separate  taxation  of  seventeen  milhons  annually, 
and  that  Ireland  was  not  to  be  charged  with  that  446  milhons 
at  all  for  its  principal  or  interest.  But  were  these  conditions 
comphed  with?  No ;  of  course  they  were  not,  and  Ireland 
now  owes  every  penny  of  that  stupendous  sum.  You  are 
charged  with  every  farthing  of  it;  and,  notwithstanding  all 
the  distinct  promises  of  Castlereagh,  the  lands,  the  properties, 
the  labors,  the  industry  of  the  Irish  peoj)le — aU,  all  are  hable 
to  be  mortgaged  for  the  debt. 

That  you  may  have  some  idea  of  the  mismanagement  as  to 
finances,  and  that  you  may  know  how  much  has  been  done  to 
accumulate  the  Irish  debt  and  to  relieve  England's,  I  refer 
you  to  the  finance  report  of  the  pubhc  expenditure.  KecoUect 
that  the  Irish  parhament  had  an  interest  in  keeping  the  peo- 
ple of  Ireland  out  of  debt ;  recollect  that  England  owed  446 
millions,  and  that  Ireland  owed  21  milhons.  The  Ii-ish  par- 
hament has  been  often  assailed,  but  could  there  have  been  a 
more  protective  parliament,  one  that  would  tend  to  keep  the 
country  more  free  from  debt  ?  The  Enghsh  parhament  were 
throwing  away  money  ;  the  Irish  parhament  were  thrifty  and 
economical,  keeping  down  the  pubhc  debt.  In  1822,  Sir  John 
Newport  remonstrated.     He  says  : 

"Ever  since  the  Union,  the  imperial  parhament  had  labored  to  raise 
the  scale  of  taxation  in  Ireland  as  high  as  it  was  in  England,  and  only 
relinquished  the  attempt  when  they  found  it  was  wholly  unproductive. 
For  twelve  years  he  had  remonstrated  against  this  scheme,  and  had 
foreseen  the  evils  resulting  from  it  of  a  beggared  gentry  and  a  ruined 
peasantry.  Ireland  had  four  miUions  of  nominally  increased  taxes, 
while  the  whole  failed  as  a  system  of  revenue,  and  the  people  were 
biu'dened  without  any  reUef  to  the  treasury.  It  would  be  found,  as  it 
was  in  some  countries,  that  the  iron  grasp  of  poverty  had  paralyzed  the 
arm  of  the  tax-gatherer,  and  limited  in  this  instance  the  omnipotence  of 
parhament.  They  had  taxed  the  people,  but  not  augmented  the  sup- 
phes  ;  they  had  drawn  on  capital — not  income ;  and  they,  in  conse- 
quence, reaped  the  harvest  of  discontent,  and  failed  to  reap  the  harvest 
of  revenue." 


234:  SELECT  SPEECHES   OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

Lord  Lansdowne,  also,  in  making  a  motion  on  the  state  of 
Ireland  in  the  same  year,  said : 

"The  revenue  in  1807  amounted  to  £4,378,241.  That  between  that 
year  and  1815,  additional  taxes  had  been  imposed,  which  were  estimated 
to  produce  £3,376,000  ;  and  that  so  far  from  an  increase  to  the  revenue 
having  been  the  result,  there  was  a  great  decline — the  revenue  in  1821 
having  been  only  £3,844,889,  or  £533,000  under  the  amount  before  the 
imposition  of  the  three  millions  and  a  half  of  new  taxes.  He  had,  on  a 
former  occasion,  stated  it  to  be  his  opinion  that  the  repeal  of  the  taxes  in 
Ireland  would  tend  mainly  to  the  revival  of  manufactures  in  that  coun- 
try, and  bringing  it  into  a  prosperous  condition.  It  was  objected  to  him 
on  that  occasion,  that  he  sought,  ))y  giving  large  and  exclusive  advan- 
tages to  Ii-eland,  to  raise  her  up  into  a  manufacturing  country,  which 
should  make  her  the  rival  of  England  and  Scotland.  While  he  dis- 
claimed any  such  intention,  he  feared  Ireland  was  far  indeed  from  any 
such  prosperity. — Hansard,  vol.  xi.,  page  659. 

GENERAL  ABSTKACT    OF  TAXES  EEPEAlED   OB  KEMTTTED    SINCE   1800. 
GBEAT   BBITAIN.  IBELAND. 

Customs £7,929,567 £635,200 

Excise, 14,093,638 368,530 

Stamps 443,634 152,609 

Post  Office 130,000 13,193 

Property  Duty. .  14,617,823 

Windows 1,577,773 179,403 

House 250,000 53,673  Hearth. 

Servants 472,061 42,988 

Carriages 391,796 71,086 

Horses 1,172,034 67,524 

Dogs 6,876 


£41,085,202  £1,584,211 

The  taxes  repealed  or  remitted  in  Ireland  being  one  twenty-sixth  part 
of  those  repealed  in  Great  Britain." 

From  Finance  Keport  of  PubHc  Expenditure,  1815  : 

"That  for  several  years  Ireland  has  advanced  in  permanent  taxation 
more  rapidly  than  Great  Britain  itself,  notwithstanding  the  immense  exer- 
tions of  the  latter  country,  including  the  extraordinary  and  war  taxes,  the 
permanent  revenue  of  Great  Britain  having  increased  from  the  year  1 801 
to  the  proportion  of  16J  to  10  ;  the  whole  revenue  of  Great  Britain,  includ- 
ing war  taxes,  as  21  i  to  10  ;  and  the  revenues  of  Ireland  in  the  proportion  of 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  235 

23  to  10,  But  in  tlie  twenty-four  years  referred  to  your  committee,  the 
increase  of  Irish  revenue  has  been  in  the  proportion  of  461  to  10  !" — 
Session  1814^15,  vol.  vi. 

"  The  annual  amount  of  taxes  repealed  in  England  since  the  peace  is 
£47,214,338,  and  the  amount  of  taxes  repealed  in  Ireland  in  the  same 
period  is  £1,575,940,  the  taxes  repealed  or  remitted  in  Ireland  being 
one  thirtieth  of  those  remitted  or  repealed  in  Great  Britain.  Here  is 
another  table,  composed  of  the  same  materials,  and  coming  out  of  the 
same  shop,  makes  the  quantity  repealed  in  England  only  £41,085,202, 
but  it  leaves  the  quantity  repealed  in  Ireland  the  same  number  as  men- 
tioned above,  or  a  little  more — it  makes  it  £1,584,211." 

Gentlemen,  would  that  occur  in  an  Irish  parliament  ?  If  he 
■was  accused  of  making  Ireland  what  she  ought  to  be  in  com- 
merce and  manufactures,  would  he  have  disclaimed  any  such 
intention  ?  And  what  must  have  been  that  spirit  of  parha- 
ment  toward  Ireland,  which  made  it  necessary  for  a  statesman 
to  disclaim  anything  so  atrocious,  so  outrageous,  and  so 
abominable,  as  the  intention  of  maldng  Ireland  the  rival  of 
England  and  Scotland  ?  You  perceive  from  this  the  fatuity 
and  folly  of  transferring  the  management  of  your  affairs  to  a 
parhament  wherein  it  was  considered  a  reproach  to  make  Ire- 
land the  equal  of  those  countries,  and  how  it  is  the  imperative 
duty  of  every  man  who  takes  a  part  in  pohtics  to  come  for- 
ward and  have  a  legislature  which  will  not  consider  it  a  re- 
proach but  a  praise  to  endeavor  to  make  Ireland  the  rival  of 
every  country  in  commerce  and  manufactures.  This  fact 
speaks  trumpet-tongued,  and  with  a  voice  that,  I  trust,  will 
rouse  you  to  just  indignation  against  any  attempt  that  may  be 
made  to  put  down  the  natural  uprising — the  peaceable  and 
tranquil  uprising — of  the  entire  Irish  people  to  obtain  the 
benefit  of  a  native  parhament.  There  is  a  document  here, 
which  I  cannot  avoid  quoting  for  you : 

"  The  enormous  excess  of  British  over  Irish  debt  at  the  Union  left 
the  British  minister  no  excuse  for  their  consolidation,  aud  accordingly 
it  was  arranged  that  the  two  debts  should  continue  to  be  separately 
provided  for.  The  active  expenditure  of  the  empire  (i.  e.,  the  expen- 
diture clear  of  charge  of  debts)  was  to  be  provided  for  in  the  propor- 
tion of  two  parts  from  Ireland  to  fifteen  from  Great  Britain.  These 
proportions  were  to  cease,  the  debts  were  to  be  consolidated,  and  the 
two  countries  to  contribute  indiscriminately  by  equal  taxes  so  soon  a3 


236  SELECT  SPEECHES   OF  DANIEL    O'CONNELL. 

the  said  respective  .debts  should  be  brought  to  bear  to  each  other  the 
proiJortions  of  the  contributions,  viz. ,  as  2  to  15  ;  provided,  also,  that  the 
fiscal  ability  of  Ireland  should  be  found  to  have  increased.  Now,  the 
2  to  15  rate  of  contribution  was  denounced  at  the  time  by  Iiishmen  as 
too  high  for  Ireland,  and  afterwards  so  admitted  by  the  British  min- 
isters themselves.  Its  consequence  was  to  exhaust  and  impoverish  her 
to  such  a  degree,  that  her  debt  in  sixteen  years  increased  230  per  cent., 
•while  the  British  only  increased  66  per  cent.  This  disproportionate 
and  unjust  increase  of  the  Irish  debt  brought  about  the  2  to  15  propor- 
tion between  it  and  the  British  debt.." 

It  is  deliglitful  to  me  to  have  an  opportunity  of  stating  these 
facts  in  a  place  from  which  I  know  they  will  be  extensively 
circulated. 

"Advantage  was  taken  of  that  single  branch  of  the  contingency  con- 
templated in  the  Union  Act,  although  the  other  branch  of  the  contin- 
gency— viz,,  the  increase  of  Ireland's  abUity,  had  not  only  occurred,  but 
by  the  confession  of  the  English  ministers  themselves,  in  1816,  the  very 
contrary  had  occurred — namely,  Ireland  had  become  poorer  than  before. 
Advantage,  we  say,  was  taken  of  that  single  branch  of  the  contingency 
to  consolidate  the  debts,  to  do  away  with  aU  measure  of  proportionate 
contribution,  and  place  the  purse  of  Ireland,  without  restriction  or  limit, 
in  the  hands  of  the  British  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  thenceforward 
to  take  from  it,  and  apply  as  he  liked,  every  penny  it  did  then  and 
might  at  any  farther  time  contain,  and  rob  Ii-eland  of  all  chance  of  bene- 
fit from  any  sui'plus  of  revenue  thenceforward  and  forever." 

Here  we  find  that  England  was  increasing  the  taxation  of 
Ireland  at  the  rate  of  £4,000,000  per  annum,  and  such  was  the 
state  of  Ireland,  that  instead  of  this  new  taxation  producing  one 
sixpence  of  revenue,  the  actual  precedent  revenue  fell  X500,000 
in  the  ensuing  year.  The  debt  of  Ireland  increased  230  per 
cent.,  while  that  of  England  increased  only  60  per  cent.  Can 
it  be  possible  that  any  one  will  say  that  that  increase  was 
necessary.  What  prosperity  can  you  have  under  such  a  state 
of  things  ?  The  moment  you  have  any  prosperity  it  will  be 
converted  into  English  revenue.  The  moment  you  are  able  to 
bear  a  new  tax,  it  will  be  used  not  only  to  pay  off  your  own  debt, 
but  to  maintain  increased  EngUsh  expenditure.  Was  there 
ever  anything  which  required  greater  vigilance  than  the  pecu- 
niary management  of  the  country?  I  have  given  you  the 
most  galling  instances  of  the  abuse  of  the  power  of  misman- 
agement.    I  have  given  those  instances  from  what,  if  they 


SPEECH  IN  HIS   OWN  DEFENCE.  237 

were  not  parliamentary  documents,  you  would  hesitate  to 
credit  the  amount  of  robbery  so  open,  plunder  so  obvious  and 
so  estensiye,  the  accumulation  of  debt  so  entirely  inconsistent 
with  the  supposed  details  of  the  Union — so  inconsistent  with 
all  that  could  occur  under  anything  hke  proper  manage- 
ment. 

You,  gentlemen,  are  famihar  in  private  Hfe,  with  the  evil 
effects  re  suiting  from  giving  to  others,  even  the  most  disinter- 
ested persons,  the  management  of  your  concerns;  and  it  is 
with  nations  as  with  individuals.  But  then,  you  may  be  told 
that  when  the  peace  came,  there  was  a  relaxation  and  a  dimin- 
ution in  the  taxation.  I  will  tell  you  what  there  has  been — 
there  has  been  a  diminution  of  taxation  in  England  of  .£41,085,- 
202,  but  in  Ireland,  the  diminution  has  been  only  Xl,584,211 ; 
that  is  in  the  proportion  of  1^  to  40.  That  is  the  way  the 
Enghsh  strike  off  taxes  for  themselves ;  that  is  the  way  they 
diminished  our  taxation.  There  is  another  bitter  ingredient 
in  our  cup,  that  the  taxation  which,  up  to  1836,  was  in  Irish 
currency,  was  then  converted  at  once  into  British  currency, 
and  by  that  operation  one-thirtieth  was  added  to  our  taxation. 
As  mercantile  men,  interested  in  the  prosperity  of  our  coimtry, 
I  ask  you,  is  it  possible  that  there  can  be  prosperity  while  the 
management  of  your  concerns  are  in  their  power  ?  Your  re- 
laxation from  taxation  depends  on  their  wiU  and  mercy.  Had 
you  an  Irish  parliament,  they  would  insist  on  the  accounts  be- 
ing fau'ly  taken.  They  would  pay  every  penny  that  Ireland 
owes,  but  no  more.  Can  you  then,  by  any  verdict,  stand  be- 
tween your  countrymen  and  the  obtaining  of  this  justice  from 
England?  I  have  shown  you  what  have  been  the  financial 
effects  of  this  miscalled  Union. 

I  shall  now  read  a  document  of  great  importance,  as  to  the 
means  by  which  the  Union  was  canied.  It  is  the  protest  of 
nineteen  Irish  peers  against  the  Union. 

[Here  the  honorable  and  learned  gentleman  read  a  protest, 
which  was  signed  Leinster,  Meath,  and  several  others  of  the  peers 
of  Ireland.] 

This,  gentlemen,  is  the  authentic  declaration  of  the  Irish 
peerage,  in  reference  to  the  atrocity  committed  against  this 


238  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL    O'CONNELL. 

country,  by  tlie  carrying  of  the  act  of  Union.  I  am  sure  there 
is  not  one  of  their  descendants  who  does  not  glory  that  his  an- 
cestor signed  that  protest,  and  I  trust  we  will  soon  have  an 
opportunity  of  seeing  those  descendants  carrying  the  inten- 
tions of  their  ancestors  into  effect,  and  taking  their  seats  in  a 
parhament  in  CoUege  Green.  Among  other  evils  resulting 
from  the  Union,  is  the  inadequacy  of  the  representation  of  Ire- 
land, as  contrasted  with  that  of  England,  and  in  particular  the 
infinitely  less  voice  of  the  people  of  Ireland,  by  reason  of  the 
inadequacy  of  the  register.  Gentlemen,  the  following  extract, 
which  is  of  some  length,  but  great  importance,  will  tend  to 
show  the  injustice  done  to  Ireland  in  the  nominal  Union,  by 
giving  something  like  an  adequate  proportion  of  representa- 
tives to  England,  but  denying  to  Ireland  a  similar  advantage. 
I  am  anxious  to  read  this  now,  and  cast  it  before  the  pubhc, 
because  there  appears  to  be  something  like  a  disposition  to 
concede  something  on  this  point.  Last  year  we  were  told 
there  was  a  termination  to  concession.  This  year  we  are  told 
that  something  will  be  done  in  the  extension  of  the  parhament- 
ary  franchise.     You  will  see  how  necessary  this  is  : 

"The  result  of  the  injustice  done  to  the  people  of  Ireland  by  the  re- 
striction of  the  elective  franchise  is  made  manifest  by  a  contrast  between 
the  population  of  the  several  counties  of  England,  and  the  number  of 
registered  voters  therein,  with  the  population  and  number  of  regis- 
tered voters  of  the  diflferent  Irish  counties.  We  take  our  statement 
of  numbers  from  the  parliamentry  papers,  and  by  comparing  the  least 
populous  counties  in  England  with  the  most  populous  in  Ireland — West- 
moreland and  Cork,  for  instance — we  find  the  following  result  :  The  ru- 
ral population  of  Westmoreland  is  43,401,  and  its  number  of  registered 
voters  after  the  Reform  Act,  amounted  to  4,392.  Nearly  one  out  of  every 
ten  inhabitants.  Whereas,  in  the  county  of  Cork  the  population  is 
703,716,  and  the  number  of  electors  registered  after  the  Irish  Reform  Act, 
was  only  3,835,  being  scarcely  one  out  of  every  two  hundred  of  the  in- 
habitants. 

"  We  ask,  therefore,  is  this  to  be  endured  ? 

"  I  may  now  mention  the  effect  in  particular  locaUties.  In  Wales  the 
population  is  800,000 — in  Cork  the  rural  population  is  713,716.  How  are 
they  respectively  represented  in  parliament  ?  Wales,  with  800,000  in- 
habitants, has  28  members  of  parhament;  the  county  Cork,  with  nearly  the 
same  population,  has  but  two  members  of  parliament ;  the  county  Mayo, 
with  400,000  inhabitants,  has  but  two  members  of  parliament  ;  Wales. 
with  800,000  inhabitants — only  double  the  number — has  28  members  of 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN   DEFENCE.  239 

parliament.  The  people  of  Ireland  don't  know  these  things,  but  I  will 
take  care  they  shall  know  it ;  and  I  anticipate  easily  the  result,  I  will 
just  give  another  specimen — I  will  take  five  counties  in  each  countiy  to 
show  you  how  the  representation  stands,  Cumberland,  with  a  popula- 
tion of  126,681,  has  four  members  ;  the  county  of  Cork,  with  a  popula- 
tion of  713,716,  has  but  two  members.  Leicestershire,  with  a  population 
of  197,276,  has  four  members.  Tipperary,  with  a  population  of  390,598 
has  but  two  members.  Northampton,  with  a  population  of  179,276,  has 
four  members.  The  county  of  Down,  with  population  of  338,571,  has 
but  two  members,  Worcestershire,  with  a  population  of  211,356,  has 
four  members.  The  county  of  Galway,  with  a  population  of  381,407,  has 
but  two  members.  Wiltshire,  with  a  population  of  239,181,  has  four 
members.  Tyrone,  with  a  population  of  302,945,  has  but  two  members. 
That  is  to  say — five  English  counties,  with  a  population  of  less  than  a 
million — that  is,  with  a  poj)ulation  amounting  to  953,770 — have  twenty 
members  ;  and  five  Irish  counties,  with  a  population  of  2,116,167  persons, 
have  only  ten  representatives.  Now  let  me  show  you  the  number  of 
electors  in  six  counties.  Westmoreland,  with  a  rural  population  of  43,- 
464,  has  4,392  registered  electors.  Cork,  with  a  rural  population  of  713,- 
716,  has  3,835  registered  electors.  Bedford,  with  a  rural  population  of  88,- 
524,  has  3,966  registered  electors.  Antrim,  with  a  rural  population  of 
316,909,  has  3,487  registered  electors.  Hertford,  with  a  rural  population 
of  95,977,  has  5,031  registered  electors.  Galway,  with  a  rural  popula- 
lation  of  381,564,  has  3,061  registered  electors, 

"Here  is  Westmoreland,  with  less  than  one  fourteenth  of  the  popu- 
lation of  Cork,  and  yet  it  has  an  absolute  majority  of  557  registered 
voters.     Is  this  to  be  called  reform  ? 

"Again,  take  the  county  of  Bedford,  with  a  rural  population  of  88,- 
424  inhabitants  ;  its  registered  voters  under  the  Reform  Act  were  3,966, 
while  Antrim,  with  a  population  of  316,909,  had  only  3,487  registered 
voters — that  is,  Bedford  had  an  absolute  majority  of  near  500  voters 
over  Antrim,  notwithstanding  the  enormous  disproportion  in  the  number 
of  its  inhabitants. 

"Hertford,  with  a  population  of  95,977  inhabitants,  had  5,013  regis- 
tered voters,  while  Galway,  with  381,564  inhabitants,  had  only  3,061 
voters," 

"  Eutlandshire,  the  smallest  county  in  England,  with  only  19,385  in- 
habitants, had  1,296  votes,  while  Longford,  with  112,558  inhabitants,  had 
only  1,294,  absolutely  two  less  than  Rutlandshire. 

"Again,  Huntingdon,  with  a  population  of  47,799  inhabitants,  had 
2,647  voters,  while  Donegal,  with  a  population  of  289,149,  had  only 
1,448  voters ;  and  Limerick,  one  of  the  wealthiest  counties  in  Ireland, 
with  an  opulent  agricultural  population  248,801  inhabitants,  had  only 
2,565  electors, 

"Nay,  even  the  Isle  of  Wight,  with  only  28,731  inhabitants,  had  1,167 
voters,  while  Mayo,  with  366,328  inhabitants,  had  only  1,350  voters,  and 


240  SELECT  SPEECHES   OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

Protestant  Tyrone,  ■with  a  population  of  310,000  inhabitants,  had  only 
1,151  electors,  absolutely  16  voters  less  than  the  Isle  of  Wight. 

"  The  Island  of  Anglesea  also,  with  a  population  of  only  33,508  inhab- 
itants, had  1,187  voters  ;  while  Kildare,  with  108,4:24  inhabitants,  had 
only  1,112  voters  ;  and  Kerry,  with  265,126  inhabitants,  had  only  1,161 
voters,  just  26  voters  less  than  Anglesea,  and  6  less  than  the  Isle  of 
Wight. 

"Even  if  we  compare  the  largest  counties  in  both  countries.  York- 
shire, with  an  agricultural  population  of  913,738  inhabitants,  and  Cork, 
with  a  population  of  703,716,  we  find  that  the  EngUsh  county  had  33,- 
154  electors,  while  the  Irish  one  had  only  3,385. 

"We  find,  therefore,  that  England,  in  her  rural  population  of  8,336, - 
000  inhabitants,  had  344,564  county  voters,  while  Ireland,  in  a  similar 
proportion  of  7,027,509  inhabitants,  had  only  60,607  registered  electors. 

"  The  consequence  of  all  these  defects  in  the  Irish  Eeform  Act  is,  that 
the  disproportion  between  the  number  of  electors  in  English  and  Irish 
cities  and  buroughs,  when  compared  to  the  relative  population,  is  as 
great  as  in  the  counties.  For  we  find  from  the  same  returns  that,  after 
the  Eeform  Act,  Exeter,  with  a  population  of  27,932  inhabitants,  had 
3,426  voters — Hull,  with  46,746  inhabitants,  had  4,275  electors — whUe 
Waterford,  with  a  population  of  28,821  inhabitants,  had  only  1,278  elec- 
tors, being  in  the  ratio  of  3  to  1. 

"Again,  comparing  the  largest  cities  and  boroughs  in  Ireland,  with 
the  smaller  ones  in  England,  we  find  the  following  results  : 

"Worcester,  with  a  population  of  27,313  inhabitants,  has  2,608  voters, 
while  Limerick,  with  a  population  of  66,554  inhabitants,  has  only  2,850 
electors. 

"  Chester,  with  only  21,363  inhabitants,  has  no  less  than  2,231  voters, 
while  Belfast,  the  wealthiest  and  most  commercial  city  in  Ireland,  with 
53,000  inhabitants,  had  only  1,926  electors. 

"  The  city  of  Cork,  with  110,000  inhabitants,  had  only  3,650  electoi-s, 
including  the  non-resident  freemen,  while  Newcastle-upon-Tyne,  with  a 
population  of  42,260  inhabitants,  had  4,952  voters.  Preston,  with  a 
population  of  33,112  inhabitants,  had  4,204  electors— both  of  them  more 
than  Cork,  which  last  city  has  more  than  treble  the  number  of  inhabit- 
ants, of  either  of  the  other  two  ;  and  Bristol,  with  104,338  inhabitants,  not 
equal  to  the  population  of  Cork,  has  10,347  voters,  being  three  times  the 
constituency  of  the  Irish  city. 

"If,  too,  we  compare  the  smaller  boroughs  in  both  countries  together, 
we  find  that  those  which  barely  escaped  schedule  A,  with  populations 
varying  from  2  to  3,000  inhabitants,  have  more  electors  than  the  bo- 
roughs in  Ireland,  retained  by  the  act  of  Union,  with  from  10  to  12,000 
inhabitants. 

"For  example,  Wallinford,  Launcestown,  Wareham,  Arundel,  have  all 
under  3,000  inhabitants,  while  the  electoral  constituencies  in  all  exceed 
300  voters.     However,  in  Athlone  and  Bandon,  with  over  ten  thousand 


SPEECH  IN  HIS   OWN  DEPENCE.  241 

inhabitants  in  each,  the  votes  do  not  exceed  250,  and  in  many  others, 
such  as  Kinsale,  Coleraine,  and  New  Ross,  the  available  constituency  falls 
short  of  200  voters. 

"If,  also,  we  compare  the  metropolitan  constituencies  of  both  coun- 
tries, where  an  equality  in  household  value  may  be  expected,  we  find 
that  Dublin,  with  a  population  of  210,000  inhabitants,  had  only  9,081 
voters,  including  all  the  bad  freemen  lately  manufactured  by  the  corpor- 
ation, while  the  city  of  London,  with  a  population  of  only  122,000  inhab- 
itants, had  18,584  electors,  and  only  17,315  houses  above  £10  value. 

"Nothing  can  more  clearly  illustrate  the  disadvantages  under  which 
the  Irish  cities  labor,  with  respect  to  the  £10  household  franchise,  than  the 
comparison  of  the  number  of  houses  of  £10  a  year  clear  value  in  London, 
and  the  number  of  electors  upon  that  quahiication,  with  the  number  of 
similar  houses  in  Dubhn,  and  of  similar  electors.  These  facts  appear 
from  the  parHamentary  returns.  The  number  of  £10  houses  in  the  city 
of  London  is  17,315,  and  the  number  of  electors  appears  to  be  18,584  ; 
while  in  Dubhn,  the  number  of  houses  of  £10  value,  according  to  Sher- 
rard's  valuation,  amounted  to  14,105,  while  the  number  of  electors  only 
amount  to  9,081.  Thus,  in  the  city  of  Loudon,  there  are  more  electors 
than  £10  householders,  whereas,  in  the  city  of  Dublin  the  aggregate  of 
electors  does  not  amount  to  within  one  third  of  the  number  of  £10 
householders. 

"  Wales  compared  with  Ireland. — "Wales  has  a  population  of  800,000. 
In  Cork  the  rural  population  is  713,716.  How  are  they  respectively 
presented  ?  Wales  has  twenty-eight  members;  Cork,  -with  nearly  the  same 
population,  has  but  two." 

Here  is  a  parliamentary  paper ;  it  was  published  in  1832, 
and  the  sessional  number  is  206.  It  states  the  relative 
amounts  of  the  Enghsh,  Scotch,  Welsh,  and  Irish  revenue  in 
that  year,  and  there  is  no  similar  paper  of  a  later  date  that  I 
am  aware  of.  The  Irish  revenue  was  X4,392,000.  The  Welsh 
revenue  was  .£348,000. 

This  is  the  exhibition  which  there  turn  makes  of  what  the 
honorable  member  considers  the  superior  wealth  of  the  princi- 
pahty  of  Wales.  That  principahty,  in  point  of  fact,  falls  be- 
low Ireland  in  any  of  those  pretensions  to  representation 
foimded  upon  wealth.  I  have  looked  into  the  amounts  of  the 
revenue  collected  in  the  single  port  of  Cork,  and  they  exceed 
that  of  the  principahty  of  Wales.  There  are  no  annual 
records  to  be  referred  to  in  such  a  case,  but  I  find  that  in  one 
year  the  customs  of  Cork  amounted  to  £263,000,  and  that  in 
another  year  the  excise  amounted  to  X272,000.   These  amounts 


242  SELECT  SPEECHES   OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

give,  I  beKeve,  a  fair  average  view  of  tlie  revenues  collected  in 
the  port  of  Cork,  and  their  total  is  £535,000.  The  receipts  of 
Wales  are  only  £548,000.  Cork,  then,  is  entitled  to  more 
members  than  the  entire  principality  of  Wales,  on  these  very 
grounds  on  which  Great  Britain  justifies  her  overwhelming 
numerical  superiority  in  the  House  of  Commons.  If  Wales 
have  not  a  representation  disproportioned  to  her  wealth,  Cork 
ought  to  return  43  members  to  parliament. 

This  is  the  way  Ireland  has  been  defrauded  in  her  fran- 
chise, her  representation,  and  in  every  one  of  the  details  of 
the  Union  measure.  But  are  there  no  other  evil  results  from 
the  Union?  Is  it  not  injurious  in  its  consequences  to  your 
commerce,  your  agriculture,  and  your  manufactures,  to  have  a 
distant  legislature?  I  had  many  particulars  to  lay  before  you, 
showing  the  state  of  different  trades  in  Dublin,  and  how  they 
had  been  injuriously  affected  by  the  total  neglect  of  an  Eng- 
lish parhament ;  but  I  shall  for  the  present  take  for  example 
the  coal  trade.  I  have  extracts  from  seven  or  eight  volumes 
of  the  Reports  of  the  Chamber  of  Commerce  upon  that  trade, 
which  I  shaU  read  to  you.  [The  honorable  and  learned  gen- 
tleman then  read  the  passages  and  proceeded.]  Why  have  I 
read  these  to  you  ?  I  will  tell  you.  For  eight  years  the  mer- 
chants of  Dublin,  the  merchants  of  Ireland,  complained  of  the 
hardship  to  their  trade.  The  Tories  were  in  office,  and  they 
were  succeeded  by  the  Whigs.  This  plain  and  palpable  vio- 
lation of  the  act  of  Union  was  estabhshed,  clearly  proved,  and 
yet  there  was  no  redress  from  Whig  or  Tory.  At  length  the 
agitation  for  Bepeal  commenced,  the  discussion  of  the  ques- 
tion was  coming  on,  and  the  Whigs  put  an  end  to  the 
grievance ;  and  what  they  would  not  do  in  justice  to  the  mer- 
cantile interests  they  did  at  length  from  a  prudent  and  proper 
motive,  and  the  articles  of  the  Union  were,  in  that  respect, 
carried  into  effect,  and  the  duties  taken  off  coal.  Gentlemen, 
I  ask  you,  is  it  not  a  sad  consequence  of  the  Union,  the  enor- 
mous expense  incurred  in  obtaining  any  private  bill  in  London 
respecting  property,  railroads,  or  any  other  matter  it  may  be 
necessary  to  obtain  it  for.  There  is  the  expense  of  going  to 
London,  the  loss  of  time  there,  and  the  heavy  cost  of  passing 
any  such  bill  through  a  committee.     What  has  lately  hap- 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  243 

pened  in  your  own  neigliborliood  ?  The  Dublin  and  Droghe- 
da  railway  bill  cost  £28,000  before  it  was  passed.  If  the  par- 
liament was  in  Dublin,  £1,000  would  be  more  than  it  would 
be  necessary  to  expend  upon  it,  and  I  defy  any  man  to  carry 
a  private  bill  there,  particularly  if  there  should  be  any  opposi- 
tion to  it,  without  a  proportionate  expense.  Can  anything  be 
more  frightful  than  the  expense  of  election  committees? 
Every  witness  must  be  taken  to  England,  and  must  be  kept 
there,  and  if  he  should  be  sent  back  after  his  examination,  or 
otherwise  out  of  the  way,  you  have  a  chance  of  losing  your 
seat  as  well  as  all  your  expenses.  Is  it  worthy  thttt  the  entire 
of  the  expense  should  be  circulated  in  London  and  not  one 
farthing  of  it  in  Dubhn,  and  not  a  single  Irish  lawyer 
receives  even  a  sohtary  fee  out  of  it,  while  such  vast  sums 
are  expended  in  the  comphcated  machinery  of  bringing  a  pe- 
tition before  a  committee  of  the  House  of  Commons  in  Lon- 
don ?  Every  shilling  goes  into  the  pockets  of  the  English 
barristers  practising  there.  Gentlemen,  the  expenditure  of 
public  estabhshments  in  this  country  before  the  Union  pro- 
duced a  considerable  mitigation  of  the  taxation.  What  is  now 
become  of  all  those  boards  ?  Where  is  the  treasury  board  ? 
Transplanted  to  England.  Where  is  the  excise  board  ?  Trans- 
ferred to  England.  The  customs  board  ?  Transferred  to  Eng- 
land. The  stamp-office  and  others  are  greatly  diminished, 
and  progressing  to  extinction — even  the  Old  Man's  Hospital 
is  extinct.  Is  this  principle  of  centrahzation  fair  which  pro- 
duces all  those  advantages  to  England,  and  all  this  misery  to 
Ireland?  I  shall  now  ask  your  attention  to  a  statement  of 
the  number  of  EngHsh  and  Scotchmen  appointed  to  offices  of 
the  state  in  Ireland.  I  take  it  from  the  Mail.  Let  me  first 
observe  that  the  Lord  Lieutenant  of  Ireland  is  an  Enghsh- 
man ;  the  Chief  Secretary  is  an  Enghshman ;  the  Lord  Chan- 
cellor is  an  Enghshman.  The  writer  in  the  Mail  proceeds,  in 
answer  to  an  article  in  the  London  Times  relative  to  this 
topic  of  complaint : 

"The  Archbishop  of  Dublin  is  an  Englishman  ;  the  chief  administra- 
tor of  the  Ii-ish  Poor  Law  is  an  Englishman  ;  the  paymaster  of  Irish  civil 
services  is  a  Scotchman ;  the  chief  commissioner  of  Irish  pubUc  works 
is  an  Englishman ;  the  Teller  of  the  Irish  Exchequer  is  an  English- 


244  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

man  ;  the  chief  officer  of  the  Irish  constabulaiy  is  a  Scotchman ;  the 
chief  officer  of  the  Irish  post-office  is  an  EngUshman ;  the  Collector  of 
Excise  is  a  Scotchman ;  the  head  of  the  revenue  police  is  an  English- 
man ;  the  second  in  command  is  a  Scotchman  ;  the  persons  employed  in 
the  collection  of  the  customs  are  EngUsh  and  Scotch — in  the  proportion 
of  thirty-five  to  one."  r    _ 

"But  the  Times  may  perhaps  observe — '  True  ;  but  all  this  is  only  the 
elucidation  of  unbarring  the  gates  of  preferment,  unsparingly  and  hon- 
estly.' Scotchmen  and  Englishmen  are  placed  in  office  in  Ireland,  and 
Irishmen,  in  return,  in  Scotland  and  England,  in  order  to  draw  closer 
the  bonds  of  union  between  the  three  united  nations. 

"Again — let  us  see  how  facts  actually  stand.  There  are  cabinet  minis- 
ters— Englishmen,  10;  Scotchmen,  3;  Irishmen,  0. 

"The  Duke  of  Wellington  scarcely  considers  himself  an  Irishman,  and 
certainly  cannot  be  called  a  representative  of  Irish  interests  in  the  cabi- 
net. 

"Lorde  of  the  Treasury — Englishmen  4,  Scotchmen  1,  Irishmen  1. 
Clerks  of  the  Treasury — Englishmen  and  Scotchmen  112,  Mr.  Fitzgerald 
(query  an  Irishman  ?)  1.  Members  of  the  Lord  Steward's  and  Lord 
Chamberlain's  Household — Englishmen  and  Scotchmen  225,  Irishmen  4. 
British  Ministers  to  Foreign  Courts — EngUshmen  and  Scotchmen  131, 
Irishmen  4.  Poor  Law  Commissioners — Englishmen  3,  Ii'ishmen  0." 
"  We  presume,"  adds  the  editor,  "  that  these  facts  show  that  the  natives 
of  the  three  kingdoms  are  all  placed  upon  an  equal  footing  !  the  chances 
of  access  to  preferment  to  an  Englishman  or  Scotchman  in  Ireland,  being 
in  the  few  instances  that  have  occurred  to  us  while  writing,  as  6  to  0  ; 
while  the  probability  of  an  Irishmen  obtaining  place  in  England,  appears, 
from  an  analogous  calculation,  to  be  in  proportion  of  491  to  10,  or 
as  1  to  50.  He  could  easily  swell,  he  adds,  this  Ust,  were  it  neces- 
saiy." 

I  have  read  that  to  you  to  show  the  meaning  of  the  phrase 
"  Ireland  for  the  Irish,  and  the  Irish  for  Ireland."  It  is  a  per- 
fect fallacy,  a  delusion  to  assert  that  the  Irish  are  indemnified 
by  promotions  or  appointments  in  England  for  the  loss  of  the 
appointments  at  home.  The  places  in  England  and  Scotland 
are  few  enough  for  EngUshmen  and  Scotchmen,  and  they  give 
them  the  places  in  Ireland  in  addition.  I  proceed,  gentlemen, 
to  show  you  other  evil  results  from  the  Union.  I  quote  from 
Fox's  remarks  upon  the  state  of  the  nation  in  1807.  The 
Union  was  atrocious  in  its  principle  and  abominable  in  its 
means.  It  was  a  measure  the  most  disgraceful  to  the  govern- 
ment of  the  country  that  was  ever  carried  or  proposed.  So 
far  was  he  from  tkiukius  that  Great  Britain  had  a  ricfht  to 


SPEECH  IN  HIS   OWN  DEFENCE.  245 

govern  Ireland  if  she  did  not  choose  to  be  governed  by  us,  that 
he  maintained  that  no  country  that  ever  had  existed  or  did 
exist,  had  a  right  to  hold  the  sovereignaty  of  another  against 
the  will  and  consent  of  that  other.  I  have  given  abundance  of 
proof  from  extracts  I  have  read  of  the  prosperity  of  Ireland 
under  the  fostering  care  of  her  own  parhament ;  but  I  will 
quote  a  little  further.  I  will  show  by  reference  to  parlia-* 
mentary  papers  the  decrease  from  1800  to  1827,  of  consump- 
tion in  Ireland,  compared  with  the  increase  in  England.  I 
find  the  respective  consumption  of  tea,  coffee,  sugar,  tobacco 
and  wine,  from  the  time  of  the  Union  to  the  year  1827,  to  be 
stated  in  the  following  manner  ; 


Tea, Increase 

Increase 

Coffee, Increase 

Increase 

Sugar, Increase 


in  England 25  per  cent. 

in  Ireland 24  " 

in  England 1800 

in  Ireland 400 

in  England 26 


Increase  in  Ireland 16  " 

Tobacco, Increase  in  England .27  " 

Decrease  in  Ireland 37  " 

Wine, Increase  in  England 24  " 

Decrease  in  Ireland 45  " 

DECEEASE  OF  CONSUMPTION  IN  IRELAND  FROM  1802  TO  1823, 
FEOM  TABLES  PUBLISHED  BY  MR.  HALLIDAY. 

IMPORTED  INTO  IRELAND. 

lbs. 

Green  Tea,   ....  1802 152,674 

1823 28,168 


Decrease, 114,506  lbs.,  or  about  ^ths. 

Port  Wine, 1802 4,487 

1823 1,014 


Decrease, 3,473  tuns,  or  about  itha. 

French  Wines, . .  1802 454  tuns. 

1823 121 

Decrease, 333  tuns,  or  about  ^th* 

Those  who  defend  the  Union  and  advocate  its  continuance 
are  in  the  habit  of  averring  that  our  trade  in  the  exportation 


246  SELECT  SPEECHES    OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

of  cattle  has  greatly  increased  since  the  passage  of  that  mea- 
sure, which  in  my  mind  has  operated  with  a  most  disastrous 
influence  on  the  fortunes  of  my  country.  But  gentlemen, 
I  hold  in  my  hand  a  document  which  demonstrate  to  you  that 
this  is  a  delusion,  and  will  make  you  clearly  understand  how 
the  real  facts  of  the  case  are.  Our  cattle  export  has  dimin- 
ished by  the  Union.     Hear  how  the  facts  reaUy  are. 

"  The  defenders  of  tlie  Union  ordinarily  lay  much  stress  on  the  in- 
creased export  of  cattle,  sheep,  and  provisions,  since  that  measure. 
This  export,  however,  is  from  a  starving  people  ;  and  being  so,  the  argu- 
ment as  to  its  great  value  to  Ireland  is  not  one  to  waste  much  time  in 
considering.  A  curious  fact  has  come  out  with  reference  to  this  subject. 
A  return  appeared  in  all  the  DubHn  papers,  last  November,  of  the  num- 
ber of  sheep  and  horned  cattle  at  the  great  fair  at  Balhnasloe,  every 
year  from  1790  to  1842.  The  following  extracts  from  it,  we  put  in  the 
same  table,  with  figures,  from  a  parliamentary  return  of  18i3,  and  the 
Irish  Railway  Report,  showing  the  export  of  the  articles  mentioned  in 
two  of  the  years  included.     We  have  no  return  of  the  export  last  year. 

1799.— Sheep,  77,900  ;  exported,  800.  Horned  cattle,  9,900  ;  exported 
14,000. 

1835.— Sheep,  62,400;  exported,  125,000.  Homed  cattle,  8,500 ;  ex- 
ported, 98,000. 

1842.— Sheep,  76,800;  horned  cattle,  14,300." 

The  question  naturally  arises — what  became  of  the  77,000 
surplus  sheep  in  the  first  year  as  well  as  the  sheep  at  other 
fairs  ?     They  were  eaten  at  home. 

"  As  to  oxen,  14,000  went  away  in  1799,  and  98,000  in  1835  ;  yet  if 
we  test  the  product  of  all  Ireland  in  the  former  year,  by  the  most  suffi- 
cient criterion  of  the  amount  at  Ballinasloe  fair,  we  shall  find  that  Ire- 
land had  then  more  for  sale  than  in  1835,  and  consumed  the  greater  part 
of  her  surplus  over  her  export — exporting  the  remainder  in  the  more 
valuable  form  of  provisions. 

"  The  parliamentary  documents  quoted  before  enable  us  to  show  what 
the  export  of  provisions  was  in  the  years  1799  and  1835  : — in  the  year 
1799  there  were  exported  14,000  cattle,  4,000  swine,  and  278,000  barrels  of 
beef  and  pork  ;  in  1835,  98,000  cattle,  76,000  swine,  and  140,000  barrels  of 
beef  and  pork.  There  has  then  been  since  the  Union  a  decrease  of 
the  more  valuable  export,  viz.,  provisions — valuable  because  of  the  la- 
bor employed  at  home  in  their  manufacture,  and  an  increase  of  the  less 
valuable,  viz.,  the  Uve  animals — less  valuable  to  a  country  as  an  article  of 
export,  by  reason  of  the  small  quantity  of  employment  which  is  given  in 
the  preparing  of  it. 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  247 

"  As  the  diminution  of  the  number  of  barrels  of  beef  and  pork  -will  not 
by  any  means  account  for  the  great  increase  of  the  Hve  export — while  the 
whole  number  of  cattle  produced  in  Ireland  in  1835  was,  at  any  rate,  not 
greater  than  in  1799 — it  follows  that  much  of  the  excess  of  live  export  in 
1835  must  have  been  by  deduction  from  the  number  previously  con- 
sumed at  home,  and  therefore  that  the  home  consumption  in  the  latter 
year  was  considerably  less  than  the  year  before  the  Union,  notwithstand- 
ing the  cent,  per  cent,  increase  of  population." 

Gentlemen,  you  must  bear  in  mind  tliat  the  trade  of  cattle 
exportation  is  much  more  beneficial  to  the  population  of  a 
country  than  made-up  provisions.  The  increase  in  cattle  ex- 
portation trade  is  indicative  of  a  country's  prosperity  in  a  de- 
gree much  more  eminent  than  the  increase  in  the  provision 
trade.  In  fact,  an  increase  in  the  latter  branch  of  commerce 
is  rather  indicative  of  distress  among  the  people.  In  the  one 
case  we  have  an  evidence  of  prosperity,  and  in  the  other  a 
clear  proof  of  poverty  and  destitution.  In  1833  Mr.  Boyton 
gave  us  the  advantage  of  a  clear  research  upon  this  subject. 
Permit  me  to  read  it  for  you : 

"  The  exports  and  imports,  as  far  as  they  are  a  test  of  a  decay  of  pro- 
fitable occupation — so  far  as  the  exports  and  imports  are  supplied  from 
the  parliamentary  returns — exhibit  extraordinary  evidences  of  the  con- 
dition of  the  laboring  classes.     The  importation  of  flaxseed,  an  evidence 
of  the  extent  of  the  most  important  source  of  employment,  was,  in  1790, 
339,745  barrels  ;    1800,  327,621  barrels  ;   1830,  460,458  barrels.     The  im- 
portation of  silk,  raw  and  thrown,  was,  in  1790,  92,091  lbs. ;  1800,  79,860 
lbs. ,  1830,  3, 190  lbs.     Of  unwrought  iron,  in  1790,  2,271  tons ;  in  1800,  10,  - 
241  tons  ;  in  1830,  871  tons.     Formerly  we  spun  aU  our  own  woolen  and 
worsted  yarn.  We  imported  in  1790  only  2,294  lbs. ;  in  1,800, 1860  lbs. ;  in 
1826,  662,750  lbs. — an  enormous  increase.    There  were,  I  imderstand,  up- 
ward of  thirty  persons  engaged  in  the  woolen  trade  in  Dublin,  who  have  be- 
come bankrupts  since  1821.    There  has  been,  doubtless,  an  increase  in  ex- 
ports of  cottons.    The  exports  were— in  1800,  9,147  yards;  1826,  7, 793,873. 
The  exports  of  cotton  from   Great  Britain  were— in  1829,  402,517,196 
yards,  value  £12,516,247,  which  will  give  the  value  of  our  cotton  exports 
at  something  less  than  a  quarter  of  a  million — poor  substitute  for  our 
linens,  which  in  the  province  of  Ulster  alone  exceed  in  value  two  mil- 
lions two  hundred  thousand  pounds.     In  fact,  every  other  return  affords 
unequivocal  proof  that  the  main  sources  of  occupation  are  decisively  cut 
off  from  the  main  body  of  the  population  of  this  country.     The  export 
of  Hve  cattle  and  of  corn  has  very  greatly  increased  ;  but  these  are  raw 
materials  ;  there  is  little  more  labor  in  the  production  of  an  ox  tlian  the 


248  SELECT  SPEECHES   OF    DAXIEL  O'CONNELL. 

occupation  of  him  wlio  herds  and  houses  him  ;  his  value  is  the  rent  of 
the  land,  the  price  of  the  grass  that  feeds  him,  while  an  equal  value  ot 
cotton,  or  linen,  or  pottery,  will  require  for  its  production  the  labor  of 
many  people  for  money.  Thus  the  exports  of  the  country  now  are  some- 
what under  the  value  of  the  exports  thirty  years  since,  but  they  employ 
nothing  like  the  number  of  people  for  their  production  ;  employment 
is  immensely  reduced  :  population  increased  three  eighths.  Thas,  in  this 
transition  from  the  state  of  a  manufacturing  population  to  an  agricultu- 
ral, a  mass  of  misery,  jDoverty,  and  discontent  is  created." 

Bj  this  statement  you  will  see  that  the  importation  of  yam 
increased,  but  that  is  no  subject  for  felicitation,  inasmuch  as 
that  increase  was  obtained  at  the  expense  of  a  diminution  in 
the  home  manufacture  of  the  article.  The  next  document  to 
which  I  will  take  the  liberty  of  directing  your  attention,  is  a 
report  by  Dr.  Stack,  in  reference  to  the  state  of  a  valuable 
charitable  institution  in  this  city.  It  is  an  important  docu- 
ment, as  clearly  evidencing  the  effects  of  the  Union  upon 
institutions  of  this  kind  : 

"  The  Sick  Poor  Institution,  since  its  establishment  in  1791,  has  shared 
in  the  sad  reverses  which  the  locality  has  undergone  over  which  its  op- 
erations extended.  The  hberties  of  Dublin,  once  the  seat  of  manufac- 
tures and  of  wealth,  have  degenerated  into  the  habitation  of  the  decayed  or 
unemployed  artisan  ;  the  abode  of  fashion  has  now  become  proverbially 
the  haunt  of  vice,  and  poverty,  and  of  disease  ;  hence  while  the  necessi- 
ty for  such  an  institution  as  this  has  become  every  day  more  urgent,  the 
supporters  of  it  have  proportionally  diminished — as  the  objects  of  re- 
lief have  increased  its  friends  have  decreased.  In  order  at  once  to  per- 
ceive this  altered  state  of  things,  a  mere  inspection  of  the  returns  made 
at  different  periods  is  aU  that  is  necessary.  In  1798,  patients,  3,610 — 
ncome,  £1,035  17s.  Id.  ;  1841,  patients,  6,159— income,  £927  4s.  lOd." 

Thus  you  will  perceive  that  while  the  patients  increased  four 
fifths,  the  income  of  the  institution  has  decreased  in  the  pro- 
portion of  three  fourths.  I  have  now  to  submit  to  your  con- 
sideration some  melancholy  details  illustrating  the  disastrous 
effects  of  the  Union  upon  our  national  industry.  The  state- 
ment may  be  rehed  on  as  strictly  authentic.  [Here  the 
learned  gentlemen  read  the  extract  alluded  to.]  There  is 
scarcely  a  trade  in  Dublin  concerning  which  I  could  not,  did 
I  not  fear  to  trespass  at  too  great  length  upon  your  attention, 
give  you  details  equally  distressing ;  for,  alas,  equally  authentic 


1 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  249 

details  showing  a  daily  decrease  of  employment,  and  a 
daily  increase  of  misery  and  distress — showing  how  men 
who  were  once  opulent  manufacturers  are  now  reduced 
to  absolute  beggary — showing  this  fact,  which  is  more  elo- 
quent than  a  thousand  arguments,  that  whereas  before  the 
Union,  there  were  68,000  operatives  in  Dubhn,  there  are  at 
present  only  4,000.  About  a  year  since  I  made  inquiries  into 
the  state  of  the  Liberty,  which  has  been  well  described  to  con- 
sist of  one  mass  of  ruins :  and  the  following  description  was 
handed  to  me.  [Here,  the  learned  gentlemen  read  the  extract 
alluded  to.]  Need  I  dwell  upon  the  evidences  of  ruined  great- 
ness and  fading  prosperity  which  every  moment  meet  your 
eye,  as  you  walk  through  the  streets  of  DubHn  ?  Need  I  tell 
you  how  prosperity,  happiness,  and  affluence,  were  once  found 
to  reside,  where. nothing  now  can  be  found  but  misery,  distress, 
and  desolation'?  I  have  a  statistical  statement  of  the  decay  of 
house  property  at  hand,  but  I  will  not  trouble  you  with  a 
lengthened  detail  of  it  at  this  hour  of  the  day.  Take  two  or 
three  of  the  leading  mansions  of  the  city,  and  mark  to  what 
they  have  been  reduced.  What  has  become  of  the  house  that 
was  once  the  noble  mansion  of  Lord  Powerscourt's  family  ? 
It  had  been  a  stamp  office  ;  it  is  now  the  counting-house  of  a 
respectable  firm  in  the  cotton,  silk,  and  woolen  trade.  What 
has  become  of  Lord  Moira's  house — that  house  which  had 
once  been  the  residence  of  the  Plantagenets  in  this  country  ? 
Alas !  are  you  not  well  aware  that  it  is  now  the  Mendicity  ? 
And  that  magnificent  edifice  the  Belvedere  house,  what  sad 
reverses  has  it  experienced  !  It  cost  c£28,000  in  the  building 
— the  stairs  alone  cost  £3,000,  but  the  whole  premises  were  the 
other  day  sold  for  a  school  to  the  Jesuits  for  eleven  hundred 
pounds ;  and  are  these  melancholy  spectacles  day  by  day,  and 
hour  by  hour,  to  be  displayed  before  our  eyes,  and  are  we  to 
make  no  effort  to  retrieve  the  fallen  fortunes  of  our  country  ? 
Are  the  men  who  would  restore  her  to  her  pristine  prosperity 
to  be  menaced  with  a  dungeon  ?  Are  the  men  who  endeavor 
to  succor  and  defend  her  to  be  branded  as  malefactors  and 
conspu-ators  ?  It  is  to  you,  gentlemen,  that  I  appeal  for  a 
solution  of  this  proposition.  I  have  established  my  position  ; 
I  have  shown  the  prosperity  of  Ireland  before  the  Union ;  I 
have  shown  the  advantages  to  be  secured  to  Ii-eland  by  a  res- 


250  SELECT   SPEECHES   OF  DANIEL  o'CONXELL. 

toration  of  her  domestic  parliament ;  I  Lave  sliown  how  man- 
ufacturers have  been  reduced  to  the  condition  of  operatives, 
and  operatives  to  the  condition  of  mendicants,  by  the  ruinous 
effects  of  that  disastrous  measure — all  that  have  I  shown  and 
nothing  more — and  for  that  I  am  to  be  persecuted  and  for 
that  I  am  to  be  prosecuted  as  a  conspirator  !  I  have  shown 
you  the  results  of  the  Union,  and  have  I  not  displayed  to  your 
eyes  a  picture  the  contemplation  of  which  renders  it  the  duty' 
of  all  honest  and  true  hearted  men  to  endeavor  to  remedy  this 
state  of  things?  That  we  are  combined  for  Kepeal  is  our 
pride  and  boast;  but  that  we  are  combined  together  for  any 
illegal  or  criminal  purpose  is  an  idea  which,  with  scorn  and 
indignation,  we  repudiate.  Even  before  the  Union  was  intro- 
duced, the  moment  there  was  an  apprehension  of  its  being 
introduced,  coupled,  as  it  was  then  said  to  be,  with  Catholic 
emancipation,  the  Catholics  of  Dubhn  held  a  meeting  in  Fran- 
cis-street, on  the  9th  of  April,  1795,  John  Sweetman  in  the 
chair,  at  which  they  expressed  their  indignant  refusal  to  ac- 
cept emancipation  coupled  with  any  Union  measui'e.  The 
first  time  I  addressed  a  pubhc  assembly  was  on  the  13th  of 
January,  1800.  It  was  my  maiden  speech.  Pray  listen  to  the 
last  passage  in  the  speech,  and  you  will  find  that  the  ruhng 
principles  of  my  entire  pohtical  life  are  all  embodied  in  it,  and 
that  my  views  were  anything,  and  are  anything,  but  sectarian. 

[Mr.  O'Connell  then  read  the  passage  from  his  speech.] 

That  was  my  first  pubhc  declaration.  In  the  sincerity  of 
my  soul  I  made  that  declaration — in  the  sincerity  of  my  soul 
I  made  that  offer.  It  might  have  been  taken  up  ;  there  was  a 
strong  party  in  the  country  at  that  time  highly  unfavorable  to 
the  Eoman  Cathohc  claims.  But  I  risked  it,  and  I  repeat, 
in  the  sincerity  of  my  soul,  I  made  the  declaration  that  I 
would  prefer  the  re-enactment  of  the  penal  code,  in  all  its  hor- 
rors, rather  than  consent  to  the  Union  ;  and  I  threw  myseK  on 
the  generosity  of  my  fellow-countrymen,  the  Protestants  of 
Ireland.  Gentlemen,  in  1810,  you  have  abeady  heard,  the 
Eepeal  was  brought  forward,  and  pubhc  meetings  were  held 
in  the  city  of  Dublin.  My  speech  upon  one  of  these  occasions 
has  been  read  for  you.     I  won't  distress  you  by  reading  any- 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  251 

tiling  like  the  entire  of  it ;  but  allow  me  to  read  for  you  the 
concluding  passage,  because  it  turns  on  a  topic  I  am  now 
discussing. 

[The  honorable  and  learned  gentleman  read  the  passage  alluded 
to.] 

Is  that  sectarianism  ?  Is  that  preferring  the  interests  of  a 
party  or  portion  of  the  people  to  the  nation  at  large  ?  Secta- 
rianism !  Why,  gentlemen,  you  cannot  but  be  aware  that  the 
cause  of  the  Protestant  dissenters  of  England  was  warmly 
advocated  by  me — that  it  was  I  drew  up  the  petition  in  favor 
of  the  English  Protestant  Dissenters — that  that  petition  was 
signed  by  twenty-eight  thousand  Catholics,  passed  at  meetings 
of  the  association,  and  afterwards  at  the  great  aggregate 
meeting  of  Cathohcs,  and  that  petition  which  I  drew  up  was 
not  upon  the  table  of  the  House  of  Commons  six  weeks  when 
the  Protestant  Dissenters  of  England  were  emancipated.  I 
therefore  treat  with  contempt  and  indignation  the  idea  of 
sectarian  diiference  ;  and  again,  throughout  the  entire  volumes 
that  have  been  presented  to  you,  has  there  been  one  word  of 
a  bigoted  description  found  among  them  ? 

I  have  made  more  speeches  than  any  other  public  man  that 
ever  existed — I  have  been  more  abused  than  any  other  man, 
but  amidst  all  their  calumnies  they  never  flimg  upon  me  an 
accusation  of  bigotry  against  my  fellow  beings  of  any  other 
persuasion.  I  have  been  calumniated  in  everything  else — in 
that  I  have  been  spared,  and  why?  because  the  folly  and 
futihty  of  the  calumny  was  so  excessive  that  even  my  calum- 
niators spared  me  on  that  point.  Sectarianism,  therefore,  is 
out  of  the  question ;  but  what  was  our  mode  ?  Legal  and 
peaceable,  and  constitutional  proceedings.  I  need  not  remind 
you  again  that  I  possess  the  confidence  of  the  Irish  people. 
I  possessed  it  with  a  full  repetition  of  my  determuiation  that 
all  should  be  peaceable,  with  my  full  declaration  that  one  sin- 
gle act  of  violence  would  detach  me  from  the  Eepeal  agitation. 
But  it  has  been  said  I  made  violent  speeches.  Has  any  vio- 
lence proceeded  from  me  ?  If  I  have  made  violent  speeches 
would  it  not  be  fak  to  give  me  a  recent  and  speedy  opportu- 
nity of   seeing  how  far    the  reports  of  those  speeches  were 


252  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

accurate,  and  what  explanatory  portions  were  applicable,  and 
not  reserve  them  for  so  remote  a  period.  If  violence  is  to  be 
talked  of,  let  us  see  this  violence — it  is  an  article  from  the 
Cheltenham  Journal  and  Stroud  Herald,  August  2,  1841. 

"  What  would,  in  reality,  be  justice  to  Ireland  ? — ^What  would  be  the 
greatest  blessing  that  could  be  conferred  on  Ireland  ?  The  answer  to 
these  questions  is  prompt,  and  comprised  in  a  single  word — conquest. 
Pew  are  the  nations,  if  any,  that  are  the  worse  for  having  been  conquered 
— and  in  the  great  majority  of  instances,  as  conquest  impUes  superiority, 
the  conquered  have  been  gainers.  The  Eomans  conquered,  and  where 
they  conquered  they  also  civilized. 

"  Now,  Ii'eland,  though  under  the  dominion  of  England,  has  never 
been  conquered  by  her.  She  may  take  this  in  the  hght  of  a  compli- 
ment, or  the  reverse.  To  this  day  she  is  wild,  savage,  uncivihzed, 
scarcely  human.  We  speak  of  the  mass  of  the  people — of  the  aborigines 
of  the  island,  of  the  Popish  part  of  the  population — of  the  wretched  and 
ferocious  slaves  of  O'ConneU — of  those  who  have  never  l)een  brought 
under  the  gentle  sway  of  the  Protestant  faith. 

"  Had  Ireland  been  actually  conquered  by  England  it  would  not  have 
been  thus. 

"The  first  step  toward  the  conquest  of  Ireland  would  be  to  send  over 
a  commanding  miUtary  force,  not  to  shed  blood,  but  to  jirevent  the  shed- 
ding of  blood. 

"  Every  individual  Popish  priest  should  then  be  secured,  and  exiled 
for  life,  nor  be  permitted  to  return  under  the  penalty  of  death  ;  and  all 
persons  found  aiding  and  abetting  a  Popish  priest  in  secreting  himself, 
should  also  be  condemned  to  exile  for  life. 

"  These  men,  the  priests,  &c,,  might  be  shipped  for  some  of  the  colo- 
nies, and  there  receive  allotments  of  land,  and  there  be  kept  under  strict 
surveillance. 

"  Such  is  a  simple  outline  of  the  measures  for  the  bloodless  conquest 
of  Ireland. 

"It  is  for  a  Conservative  government  alone  to  achieve  this  glory.  Let 
Sir  Robert  Peel  and  his  colleagues  look  to  it." 

It  appears  by  those  papers  that  we  did  not  threaten  any- 
thing, and  it  appears  distinctly  that  every  disclaimer,  and  repe- 
tition  of  disclaimer,  to  use  anything  but  peaceable  and  legal 
means,  was  given  over  and  over  again.  There  was  no  violence 
of  any  kind ;  none  whatever  had  taken  place.  We  are  now 
charged  with  a  newspaper  conspiracy,  because  it  is  alleged 
that  certain  newspapers  contained  libels.  Why,  if  they  did, 
there  is  no  person  in  the  world  more  open  to  or  capable  of 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  253 

punisliment  for  an  offence  than  a  newspaper  proprietor.  He 
is  perhaps  more  in  the  hands  of  the  law  than  any  other  man 
in  existence.  There  is  the  stamp  office,  which  must  know  all 
about  him,  and  the  moment  he  offends  they  have  nothing  to  do 
but  call  on  him  to  account  for  his  actions.  The  Attorney- 
General  had  this  facihty  if  he  wished,  or  if  the  hbel  law  had 
been  infringed.  But  there  is  one  thing  in  the  so-called  news- 
paper conspiracy  that  cannot  be  got  over.  Take  up  the  Na- 
tion, which  was  read  for  you — a  great  deal  of  prose,  and  a 
considerable  quantity  of  poetry — ^love  songs  and  all,  and  then 
take  up  the  Pilot,  which  was  also  read  for  you — all  prose  and 
no  poetry — take  up  any  of  these  articles,  and  can  you  say  that 
one  of  the  journals  copied  the  other  ?  Can  they  produce  any 
one  of  these  papers  where  the  other  copied  an  article  from  it  ? 
No,  they  cannot ;  and  they  could  not  charge  them  with  con- 
spu'acy  unless  they  joined  for  that  purpose.  In  place  of  con- 
spiracy they  would  find  discord,  not  concord,  between  them. 
There  was  not  a  particle  of  combination  among  them.  In 
fact,  there  was  not  only  no  combination  among  them,  but  a 
kind  of  rivalship  and  jealousy  relative  to  these  articles.  Was 
that  like  combination  or  crime  ?  I  wiU  not  go  into  that  ques- 
tion at  present,  as  it  is  so  well  ascertained.  Well,  gentlemen, 
one  word  about  arbitration  courts.  I  sliall  not  trouble  you 
with  many  observations  on  that  head.  One  of  the  great  ad- 
vantages of  these  courts,  however,  was  the  abohtion  of  un- 
necessary and  superfluous  oaths.  There  was  no  oath  taken  in 
these  courts  at  all.  Gentlemen,  I  do  not  know  if  it  strikes  you 
in  the  same  light  as  it  strikes  me,  on  the  subject  of  oaths  ;  but 
I  think  the  estabHshing  of  such  courts  a  great  advantage  in 
that  respect.  In  the  superior  courts  the  oath  was  a  different 
thing ;  but  I  ask  any  Christian  man  if  he  would  not  wish  to 
see  unnecessary  swearing  abolished. 

I  find  by  a  parliamentary  return  in  1832  that  there  were  one 
hundred  and  seventy-two  thousand  oaths  taken  in  the  excise 
department,  and  in  another  year  one  hundred  and  fifty-eight 
thousand  in  the  excise  also.  This  was  an  unnecessary  profana- 
tion of  the  name  of  the  Deity— one  hundred  and  fifty-eight  thou- 
sand oaths  in  one  year,  and  one  hundred  and  seventy-two  thou- 
sand in  another !     What  an  enormous  quantity  of  unnecessary 


254  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

oaths !  In  the  arbitration  courts  there  was  no  oath  whatever 
necessary.  I  shudder  at  the  idea  of  so  many  oaths  being  taken 
in  one  year,  and  I  had  several  conversations  on  the  subject, 
and  Lord  Nugent  did  me  the  high  honor  to  ask  my  assistance  in 
bringing  in  a  bill  to  abolish  unnecessary  oaths,  and  substitute 
a  declaration  in  the  stead.  I  consented,  and  we  succeeded  in 
passing  a  bill  substituting  declarations  instead  of  oaths,  and 
I  hope  I  shall  see  the  day  when  such  will  be  extended  even 
farther,  for  I  abhor  the  taking  of  the  sacred  name  of  God  in 
vain,  and  the  man  who  would  tell  an  untruth  in  a  matter  of 
property,  would  not  set  the  least  value  on  his  oath,  nor  would 
he  at  all  scruple  swearing  to  what  he  knew  to  be  false  if  he 
thought  it  ripe  for  his  purpose.  I  hope,  gentlemen,  we  will 
see  the  day  when  declarations  like  the  Quakers,  which  are  as 
biuding  on  the  conscience  as  the  oath,  will  be  substituted  and 
used  as  an  oath  by  all  Christian  men  and  in  all  Christian  coun- 
tries.    I  am  sure  you  will  not  ascribe  conspiracy  to  that. 

Well,  gentlemen,  I  now  come  to  the  means  by  which  we  were 
to  achieve  the  Repeal  of  the  Legislative  Union.  The  means 
are  pacific,  and  I  would  not  adopt  any  other  means  for  the  ac- 
complishment of  that  sacred  object.  It  was  said  that  the 
meetings  were  not  commensurate  with  the  objects  in  view,  but 
the  object  was  one  that  could  not  be  ascertained  if  the  entke 
Irish  people  had  not  called  for  the  Eepeal  of  that  Union.  A 
charge  of  that  description  should  not  be  made  when  the  Irish 
people  demanded  it.  The  words  of  Grattan  were  that  the  de- 
mand was  made  backed  by  the  voice  of  the  Irish.  I  re-echo 
that  word,  and  the  minister  was  bound  to  obey  that  call.  We 
have  made  the  experiment,  and  we  find  that  the  miud  of  the 
nation  is  in  favor  of  a  domestic  legislature.  We  have  made  the 
experiment — we  did  not  do  so  without  the  enunciation  of  the 
voice  of  the  Irish  people.  We  have  that  voice  from  one  end 
of  the  country  to  the  other.  The  voice  has  gone  abroad,  and 
it  only  remains  for  the  Irish  people  to  call  for  the  restoration 
of  their  Irish  parhament.  When  I  brought  the  question  be- 
fore the  House  of  Commons,  the  members  who  supported  it 
were  few — only  one  Englishman,  and  not  one  Scotchman ;  but 
what  was  the  change  since  that  time  Avith  respect  to  the 
measure  ?    And  was  it  not  idle  and  absurd  in  the  last  degree 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  255 

to  say  tliat  anything  was  intended  save  the  regeneration  of 
the  country  by  the  most  peaceable  means?  What  has  the 
Crown  read  for  you  as  part  of  the  conspiracy?  Why,  the 
rules  of  the  Association. 

[He  proceeded  to  read  the  rules,  which  were  already  before  the 
public] 

Mr.  O'Connell  then  continued.  This,  gentlemen,  is  the  plan 
of  the  Repeal  Association.  No  alternative  was  held  out  by 
these  rules  but  the  fullest  allegiance,  the  most  perfect  loyalty, 
and  unqualified  peace;  and  in  this  way,  and  no  other,  was 
agitation  to  be  conducted.  Yet,  under  these  circumstances 
we  have  the  charge  of  combination  made  against  us,  which 
amounts  to  one  of  conspiracy.  That  document,  gentlemen,  is 
given  in  proof  against  us.  Well,  however,  to  carry  their  proof 
further,  the  Crown  have  read  two  other  documents.  The  first 
is,  "  The  Reconstruction  of  the  House  of  Commons,"  and  the 
second,  "  The  Renewed  Action  of  the  Irish  parHament."  The 
first  of  these  was  signed  upon  the  14th  of  May,  1840,  and  the 
second  upon  the  22d  of  August,  1843.  Now,  my  lords,  this 
has  been  read  against  us  as  evidence  of  a  conspiracy.  And 
although  it  has  been  read  before,  I  think  it  my  duty  to  read 
it  again. 

Chief  Justice. — What  is  the  date  of  the  document  you  are 
about  reading  from,  Mr.  O'Connell? 

Mr.  O'Connell.— The  14th  of  May,  1840,  my  lord.  Mark, 
gentlemen,  that  after  taking  the  scale  of  representation  from 
the  returns  of  the  population  of  the  different  towns,  it  begins 
at  page  7,  thus : 

[Here  the  honorable  and  learned  gentleman  read  the  extract.] 

Mr.  O'Connell  then  proceeded.  Part  of  that  document  has 
been  read  by  the  Crown,  and  it  distinctly  states  that  by  par- 
liamentary means,  and  by  parliamentary  means  only,  was  Re- 
peal to  be  obtained.  I  shall  call  your  attention  by-and-by  to 
a  portion  of  that  document.  The  next  document  was  also 
read,  and  I  am  entitled  to  the  full  force  of  all  it  contains. 
The  Crown  has  no  right  to  select  portions  from  it,  and  I  am 
entitled  to  the  benefit  of  the  unobjectionable  parts,  for  they 
had  no  right  to  suppress  them. 


256        SELECT  SPEECHES  OF  DANIEL  0  CONNELL. 

[Mr.  O'Connell  then  read  "  The  Renewed  Action  of  the  Irish 
parhament."] 

There,  my  lords,  is  the  evidence  for  the  prosecution — there 
is  the  evidence  to  prove  a  conspiracy — there  is  the  evidence  to 
prove  illegal  means — there  is  the  evidence  to  prove  illegal 
objects.  Gentlemen  of  the  jury,  I  put  it  to  you,  it  is  not  my 
evidence,  'tis  not  I  produces  it,  'tis  not  we  who  have  called 
upon  it  in  our  defence ;  though  it  does  contain,  I  think,  an 
admirable  defence  ;  but  it  is  brought  before  you  on  the  part 
of  the  Crown,  and  produced  by  the  Attorney-General ;  that  is 
the  Attorney-General's  evidence,  and  upon  that  evidence  I 
call  upon  you  to  acquit  us — you  are  bound  to  beUeve  it ;  there 
is  the  plan  for  Eepeal,  what  fault  do  you  find  with  it  ?  There 
is  a  theory  introduced  into  it  not  called  upon  for  practice,  but 
I  insist  upon  my  right  to  discuss  that  theory.  I  may  be 
wrong,  but  it  is  a  great  constitutional  question  which  man  is 
at  liberty  to  discuss,  and  form  his  opinion  upon.  The  opinion 
may  be  erroneous,  but  the  right  is  undoubted,  and  I  insist 
upon  it  that  question  ought  to  be  considered  in  a  w^ay  favor- 
able to  the  claims  of  Ireland.  The  competency  of  the  Irish 
parhament  to  pass  the  Act  of  Union  was  discussed  long 
before  the  Union  itself  was  talked  of. 

One  of  the  works  by  which  the  revolution  of  1688  was  con- 
sohdated,  was  a  book  written  by  Mr.  Locke  upon  government. 
He  wrote  it  for  the  purpose  of  sustaining  the  "Whigs  of  that 
day — the  "Wilhamite  Whigs — to  prove  that  James  had  no  title 
to  the  throne,  and  that  Wilham  was  the  lawful  monarch  of 
England  in  consequence  of  what  had  happened.  That  book, 
gentlemen  of  the  jury,  was  a  class-book  in  Trinity  College  at 
the  time  the  Union  passed.  It  was  a  book  out  of  which  the 
young  men  were  examined.  Shortly  after  the  Union  it  was 
found  inconvenient  to  let  it  remain,  and  for  some  reason,  I 
don't  know  the  cause,  but  it  was  withdrawn.  But  at  one  time 
it  was  a  book  of  authority,  and  requiring  not  any  council  to 
give  it  authority ;  it  was  the  great  instrument  by  means  of 
which  the  revolution  of  '88  was  achieved,  the  principle  of 
which  revolution  no  man  admires  more  than  I  do.  In  Locke's 
book  on  government,  I  find  : 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  257 

"The  legislators  cannot  transfer  the  power  of  making  laws  into 
other  hands,  for  it  being  but  a  delegated  power  from  the  people,  they 
who  have  it  cannot  pass  it  over  to  others.  The  people  alone  can 
appoint  the  form  of  the  commonwealth,  which  is  by  constituting  the 
legislature  and  appointing  in  whose  hands  that  shall  be  ;  and  when  the 
people  will  have  said,  "We  submit,  and  will  be  governed  by  laws  made 
by  such  men  and  in  such  terms,  nobody  else  can  say  other  men  shall 
make  laws  for  them.  The  power  of  the  legislature  being  derived  from 
the  people  by  a  positive  voluntary  grant  and  institution,  can  be  no  other 
than  what  the  positive  grant  conveyed,  which  being  only  to  make  laws 
and  not  to  make  legislatures,  the  legislatui'e  can  have  no  power  to  transfer 
their  authority  of  making  laws,  or  to  place  it  in  other  hands." 

No  doctrine  can  be  more  distinct.  No  delegated  legislature, 
elected  for  a  time,  had  power  or  authority  to  transfer  the  rights 
of  their  constituents  to  anybody  else.  Upon  this  subject 
Lord  Grey  was  Tery  explicit. 

Lord  Grey,  then  Mr.  Charles  Grey,  said  in  the  British 
House  of  Commons : 

"Though  you  should  be  able  to  carry  the  measure,  yet  the  people  of 
Ireland  would  wait  for  an  opportunity  of  recovering  their  rights,  which 
they  will  say  were  taken  from  them  by  force," 

But  I  have  still  more  expHcit  authority.  Hear  this  passage 
from  the  speech  of  Mr.  Saurin,  spoken  on  the  15tli  of  March, 
1800,  read  by  me  on  the  trial  of  John  Magee,  in  his  presence, 
and  adopted  with  manliness  by  the  Attorney  General  of  the 
day  : 

"Those  great  men  had  assisted  in  the  revolution  of  1688 — they  had 
put  down  the  slavish  doctrines  of  passive  obedience,  they  had  declared 
that  the  King  held  his  crown  by  compact  with  the  people,  and  that  when 
the  Crown  violated  that  compact,  by  subverting,  or  attempting  to  sub- 
vert, the  constitution  which  was  the  guarantee  and  safeguard  of  that 
people's  liberty,  the  crown  was  forfeited,  and  the  nation  had  a  right  to 
transfer  the  sovereign  power  to  other  hands.  They  had  no  notion  of  the 
doctrines,  which  he  was  sony  to  see  now  received — that  the  supreme 
power  of  the  state  was  omnipotent,  and  that  the  people  were  bound  to 
submit,  whatever  that  power  thought  proper  to  inflict  upon  them.  At 
that  day  such  a  monstrous  proisosition  as  this  would  not  have  been  tol- 
erated, though  now  it  began  to  raise  its  head  and  threaten  the  constitu- 
tion. But  he  for  one  would  not  admit  it  ;  he  would  re- assert  the  doc- 
trine of  the  glorious  revolution,  and  boldly  declare  in  the  face  of  that 
House,  and  of  the  nation,  that  when  the  sovereign  power  violated  that  com- 


258  SELECT  SPEECHES   OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

pact,  wliich  at  its  institiition  was  declared  to  exist  between  the  govern- 
ment and  the  people,  that  moment  the  right  of  resisting  that  power  ac- 
crues. Whether  it  would  be  prudent  in  the  people  to  avail  themselves 
of  that  right  would  be  another  question  ;  but  surely  if  there  be  this  right 
in  the  nation  to  resist  an  unconstitutional  assumption  of  power  which 
threatened  the  public  liberty,  there  could  not  occur  a  stronger  case  for 
the  exercise  of  it  than  this  measure  would  afford,  if  carried  against  the 
will  of  the  majority  of  the  nation." 

Nothing  can  be  more  explicit  than  that  constitutional  doc- 
trine ;  nothing  can  be  more  extensive  than  its  operation.  It 
was  asserted  by  Saurin,  quoting  the  highest  authority  of  the 
heroes  of  the  revolution  of  '88,  so  called,  of  the  persons  that 
carried  that  revolution,  that  by  the  EngHsh  constitution  the 
principle  of  passive  obedience  and  non-resistance  is  totally 
ffxreign  to  our  constitution — the  right  to  resist — rather  a  deli- 
cate question — commences  when  the  contract  is  broken ;  but 
the  existence  of  a  constitutional  right  of  that  description  shows 
it.  The  revolution  itself  would  be  void  if  this  doctrine  were  not 
true.     He  then  goes  on  to  say : 

"If  a  Legislative  Union  should  be  so  forced  upon  this  country  against 
the  will  of  its  inhabitants,  it  would  be  a  nullity,  and  resistance  to  it 
would  be  a  struggle  against  usurpation  and  not  a  resistance  against  law." 

That  was  alleged,  too,  with  reference  to  a  period  after  the 
Union  was  carried ;  that  is,  looking  to  its  ha^dng  all  the  sanc- 
tion of  form,  the  great  seal  of  England  on  the  one  hand,  the 
great  seal  of  Ireland  on  the  other,  and  the  consent  of  the 
Crown  given  to  it ;  yet  Mr.  Saurin,  talking  constitutional  doc- 
trine, declared  it  to  be  a  nuUity,  and  resistance  to  it  a  matter 
of  prudence.  And  in  a  second  speech  of  his,  which  was  pub- 
lished in  the  shape  of  a  pamphlet : 

"You  may  make  the  Union  binding  as  a  law,  but  you  cannot  make  it 
obligatory  on  conscience.  It  will  be  obeyed  so  long  as  England  is  strong, 
but  resistance  to  it  will  be  in  the  abstract  a  duty,  and  the  exhibition  of 
that  resistance  will  be  a  mere  question  of  prudence. 

I  will  be  bound  by  it,  says  he,  as  a  law,  and  so  say  I,  but  it 
will  be  void  in  conscience  and  constitutional  principle.  It  will 
be  obeyed  as  a  law,  but  it  will  be  the  duty  of  the  people  to 
exhibit  that  resistance  to  it  when  it  is  prudent  to  do  so.     He 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  259 

did  not  mean  by  that  resistance,  force,  or  violence — ^lie  meant 
legal  and  peaceable  means — but  by  means  adequate  to  the 
purpose  while  they  keep  within  the  precincts  of  the  law. 
There  is  another  authority — Lord  Plunkett.     He  says  : 

"  Sir,  I,  in  the  most  express  terms,  deny  the  competency  of  parUament 
to  do  this  act.  I  warn  you,  do  not  dare  to  lay  your  hands  on  the  con- 
stitution. I  tell  you,  that  if,  circumstanced  as  you  are,  you  pass  this 
act,  it  ■will  be  a  mere  nullity,  and  no  man  in  Ireland  will  be  bound  to 
obey  it.  I  make  the  assertion  deliberately.  I  repeat  it.  I  call  on  any 
man  who  hears  ine  to  take  down  ray  words.  You  have  not  been  elected 
for  this  purpose.  You  are  appointed  to  make  laws,  and  not  legislatures 
— you  are  appointed  to  exercise  the  function  of  legislators,  and  not  to 
transfer  them — you  are  appointed  to  act  under  the  constitution,  and  not 
to  alter  it ;  and  if  you  do  so,  your  act  is  a  dissolution  of  the  government 
— you  resolve  society  into  its  original  elements,  and  no  man  in  the  land 
is  bound  to  obey  you.  Sir,  I  state  doctrines  that  are  not  merely  founded 
on  the  immutable  laws  of  truth  and  reason  ;  I  state  not  merely  the 
opinion  of  the  ablest  and  wisest  men  who  have  written  on  the  science  of 
government ;  but  I  state  the  practice  of  our  constitution  as  settled  at  the 
era  of  the  revolution  ;  and  I  state  the  doctrine  under  which  the  House 
of  Hanover  derives  its  title  to  the  throne.  Has  the  King  a  right  to 
transfer  his  Crown  ?  Is  he  competent  to  annex  it  to  the  Crown  of  Spain, 
or  any  other  country  ?  No  ;  but  he  may  abdicate  it,  and  eveiy  man  who 
knows  the  constitution,  knows  the  consequence — the  right  reverts  to  the 
next  in  succession.  If  they  all  abdicate,  it  reverts  to  the  peojsle.  The 
man  who  questions  this  doctrine,  in  the  same  breath  must  arraign  the 
sovereign  on  the  throne  as  a  usurper.  Are  you  competent  to  transfer 
your  legislative  rights  to  the  French  Council  of  Five  Hundred  ?  Ai*e 
you  competent  to  transfer  them  to  the  British  parliament  ?  I  answer — 
No  !  If  you  transfer,  you  abdicate  ;  and  the  great  original  trust  reverts 
to  the  people  from  whom  it  issued.  Yourselves  you  may  extinguish,  but 
parliament  you  cannot  extinguish.  It  is  enthroned  in  the  hearts  of  the 
people — it  is  enshrined  in  the  sanctuary  of  the  constitution — it  is  as  im- 
mortal as  the  island  which  it  protects.  As  well  might  the  frantic  suicide 
hope  that  the  act  which  destroyed  his  miserable  body  should  extinguish 
his  eternal  soul !  Again  I  tlierefore  warn  you.  Do  not  dare  to  lay  your 
hands  on  the  constitutiou — it  is  above  your  powers." 

Oh,  it  is  a  beautiful  passage — "  As  weU  might  the  frantic 
suicide  hope  that  the  act  which  destroys  his  miserable  body 
should  extinguish  his  eternal  soul !  Again  I  therefore  warn 
you.  Do  not  dare  to  lay  your  hands  on  the  constitution — it  is 
above  your  powers."     I  insist  on  the  truth  of  that  constitu- 


260  SELECT   SPEECHES   OF    DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

tional  law.  I  take  the  qualification  as  laid  down  by  Samin — ■ 
it  is  binding  as  a  law  while  it  continues  to  have  the  form  and 
shape  and  pressure  of  law,  but  it  does  not  bind  on  conscience 
or  principle.  Though  it  had  been  said  to  me :  "Why,  this 
would  make  all  the  acts  which  were  passed  since  the  Union 
Yoid.  I  deny  it,  it  would  do  no  such  thing.  I  say  they  are 
voidable,  but  not  void.  It  has  been  said,  you  would,  by  that 
repeal  even  the  Emancipation  Act.  If  I  could  get  the  repeal 
of  the  Union,  I  would  make  you  a  present  of  Emancipation. 
Where  do  I  find  the  principle  of  its  being  voidable,  not  void  ? 
I  find  it  in  the  language  of  Saurin.  I  may  be  wrong  in  this 
position,  but  I  cannot  be  wrong  to  argue  from  it.  It  may  be 
said  that  this  act  is  to  be  obeyed,  and  it  is  to  be  considered 
as  law. 

Gentlemen  of  the  jury,  the  point  was  raised  abeady  in  1782, 
when  the  Irish  parliament  declared  that  no  power  on  earth 
could  bind  the  Irish  people  but  the  King,  lords,  and  commons 
of  Ireland ;  and  there  was  an  act  passed  to  that  effect,  the 
consequence  of  which  was  to  do  away  with  the  authority  of 
all  laws  passed  in  England,  and  which  were  binding  on  Ii'e- 
land,  though  they  regulated  the  property  of  Ireland ;  but 
Chief  Baron  Yelverton  stepped  in,  and  by  his  act,  declared  aU 
laws  passed  in  England  to  be  binding  in  Ireland,  and  that 
they  should  continue  to  be  so.  But  it  may  be  said  this  is  in- 
consistent with  our  allegiance — I  deny  it ;  for  this  authority 
exists  in  the  Queen,  which  can  only  be  exercised  through  her 
responsible  minister.  It  is  no  derogation  of  her  power — it  is 
rather  an  increase  of  that  power.  And  shall  I  be  told  this  of 
a  country  which  has  made  so  many  irregular  successions? 
Eiichard  the  Second  was  dethroned  by  parhament — so  was 
Eichard  the  Third,  and  Henry  the  Seventh  set  up.  Then 
also  the  royal  succession  was  altered  in  the  reign  of  Kenry  the 
Eighth,  and  settling  nothing,  there  was  another  alteration  at 
the  time  of  the  revolution  in  1688 — so  that  there  could  not  be 
anything  illegal  in  discussing  this  question.  Surely  not. 
There  may  be  a  mistake — there  may  be  an  error,  but  there 
cannot  be  crime  to  discuss  the  matter  publicly,  undesignedly, 
and  with  the  sustentation  of  the  authorities  I  have  addressed. 
You  have  Saurin,  and  Plunkett — you  have  Locke,  you  have 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  261 

Lord  Grey  giving  his  opinion  in  favor  of  it.  I  draw  to  a 
close. 

I  come  back  to  the  evils  of  the  Union,  and  I  would  look  to 
every  honest  man  to  exert  himself  for  its  repeal.  Would  it  not 
cure  the  odious  evils  of  absenteeism  ?  It  was  calculated  by 
an  able  man  that  nine  million  pounds  a  year,  pass  out  of  this 
country ;  the  railway  commissioners  reduce  it  to  six  millions. 
Take  the"  reduced  amount,  and  I  ask,  did  ever  a  country  suffer 
such  an  odious  drain  of  six  million  pounds  of  absentee  money  ? 
Six  million  pounds]  raised  every  year  in  this  country,  not  to 
fructify  it — not  to  employ  the  people  of  the  country,  not  to 
take  care  of  the  sick  and  poor  or  destitute — ^but  six  millions 
are  transplanted  to  foreign  lands — sent  there  but  giving  no  re- 
turns— leaving  poverty  to  those  who  enriched.  Take  six  mil- 
lions for  the  last  ten  years.  Look  now  at  sixty  millions  drawn 
from  this  unhappy  country.  Take  it  for  the  next  six  years — 
can  you  in  conscience  encourage  this  ?  There  is  a  cant  that 
agitation  prevents  the  influx  of  capital.  What  is  the  meaning 
of  that  ?  We  do  not  want  English  capital ;  leave  us  our  own 
six  millions,  and  we  shall  have  capital  in  abundance.  We  do 
not  want  that  left-hand  benevolence  which  would  drain  the 
country  with  one  hand,  and  let  in  niggardly  with  the  other. 
There  is  another  item  whicli  exhausts  the  resources  of  this 
country,  and  that  to  the  amount  of  nearly  X2, 000,000  annually ; 
in  the  last  year  it  was  so  low  as  X700,000,  but  whether  the  one 
or  the  other,  it  is  drawn  out  of  the  country  never  to  return. 
There  is  again  the  Woods  and  Forests.  That  department  re- 
ceives X74,000  a  year  out  of  Ireland  in  quit  rents,  etc.  How 
was  that  expended  for  the  last  ten  years?  Between  the 
Thames  Tunnel,  and  to  ornament  Trafalgar  Square.  We 
want,^n  additional  bridge  in  Dublin.  Why  have  we  not  the 
.£74,000  for  that  purpose  ?  Have  we  not  as  good  a  j-ight  as 
that  it  should  be  expended  on  Trafalgar  Square  ?  If  we  had 
the  parhament  in  College  Green,  would  that  £74,000  be  sent 
to  adorn  a  square  in  London?  Have  we  not  sites  and 
squares  enough  in  Dublin  for  the  purpose  of  public  utility  ? 

There  are  other  evils  attending  this  continued  drain  on  the 
country.  I  remember  there  having  been  quoted  in  parhament 
the  work  of  Mr.  Young,  a  poUtical  economist,  who  journeyed 


262  SELECT  SPEECHES    OF  DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

in  Ireland  in  '78,  who,  in  speaking  of  the  increase  of  popula- 
tion, he  accounted  for  it  by  the  never-failing  bellyful  of  pota- 
toes— they  had  all  a  bellyful  of  potatoes,  and  to  that  he  at- 
tributed the  increase.  But  is  that  the  case  now  ?  Has  not 
the  country  sensibly  declined  ?  is  not  even  one  meal  of  pota- 
toes a  treat  and  a  treasure  ? 

According  to  the  evidence  of  the  commissioners  of  Poor-law 
inquiry  the  people  are  now  in  rags.  "Was  this  my  language  ? 
No,  gentlemen.  I  appeal  to  yourselves — are  they  not  reduced 
to  misery  and  wretchedness,  frittered  away  by  periodical  fam- 
ine ? — and  there  were  six  or  eight  since  the  Union.  There  was 
relief  from  England,  while  provisions  were  in  quantities  trans- 
jDorted  from  this  country  ;  provisions  were  in  the  country  while 
the  people  were  perishing  with  hunger  ;  and  those  provisions 
were  exported  from  the  country.  But  the  Poor-law  Commis- 
sioners report  the  following  frightful  picture.  But  first  let  me 
tell  you  that  the  Population  Commissioner's  report  shows  the 
aggravation  of  the  evil.  The  gentleman  who  made  that  report 
is  a  military  officer — Captain  Larcom — a  man  of  science,  of 
integrity,  and  of  honor.  He  reports  the  state  of  the  popula- 
tion to  be  this,  that  30  per  cent,  of  the  town  and  city  popula- 
tion were  in  abject  poverty,  and  that  70  per  cent,  of  the 
agricultural  were  in  q,bject  poverty.  These  are  not  my  words, 
they  are  the  words  of  Captain  Larcom.  Where,  then,  is  the 
advantage  of  the  Union,  which  has  thus  increased  poverty, 
bringing  pestilence,  and  involving  our  poor  in  misery  and 
filth?  Gentlemen,  why  should  we  not  adojDt  any  plan  by 
which  we  would  escape  from  these  horrors.  To  be  sure,  the 
Poor-law  Commissioners  go  more  into  details.  Mind  you,  gen- 
tlemen, this  is  evidence  made  on  oath  before  the  Poor-law 
Commissioners.     Allow  me  to  read  some  of  it  to  you. 

"  One  family  had  but  one  meal  for  the  space  of  three  days — another 
subsisted  on  a  quart  of  meal  a  day  ;  another  hved  on  a  Httle  boiled 
cabbages  without  anything  to  mix  with  them." 

Gentlemen,  I  will  not  harass  your  feehngs  by  reading  any 
m6re  ;  the  book  is  full  of  them  ;  and  are  two  milhons  three 
hundred  thousand  of  your  fellow-countrymen  to  Hve  in  a  state 
of  positive  destitution,  and  nothing  to  be  done  for  them  ?  Is 
no  effort  to  be  made  ?     Permit  me  to  call  your  attention  to  a 


SPEECH  IN  HIS  OWN  DEFENCE.  263 

few  passages  of  a  report  of  a  meeting  held  last  Monday  week, 
in  reference  to  the  sick  and  indigent  of  your  city.  [Mr. 
O'Connell  then  read  an  extract  from  Saunders,  detaiUng  the 
misery  which  pervaded  the  city.]  Can  any  language  of  mine 
describe  the  misery  which  exists,  more  fully  ? 

Another  hideous  feature  of  Captain  Larcom's  rejDort  is,  that 
the  population  is  diminishing  by  70,000  in  ten  years.     It  is 
increased  from  the  period  of  1821  to  1831 ,  and  from  that  to 
1841  the  population  has  diminished  by  the  number  of  70,000, 
who  would  have  been  all  reared  up  if  they  had  anything  to 
support  them  ;   and  are  we  to  be  hunted  down,  who  are  the 
friends  of  the  poor  ?     Are  we,  who  wish  to  have  industry  re- 
warded— are  we,  I  ask  it  on  every  principle  of  sense  and  jus- 
tice— are  we  to  be  prosecuted  and  persecuted  for  seeking  the 
means  of  relieving  this  distress  ?    We  have  the  means  of  rehef 
in  our  power ;  we  live  in  the  most  fertile  country  in  the  world, 
no  country  is  in  possession  of  such  harbors,  the  earliest  his- 
torical mention  of  which  is  made  by  Tacitus,  admitting  that 
our  harbors  were  the  best,  and  that  consequently  they  were 
more  crowded.     The  country  is  intersected  with  noble  estua- 
ries.     Ships  of  five  hundred  tons  burden  ride  into  the  heart  of 
the  country,  safe  from  every  wind  that  blows.    No  countr}'  pos- 
sesses such  advantages  for  commerce ;  the  machinery  of  the 
world  might  be  turned  by  the  water-power  of  Ireland.     Take 
the  map,  and  dissect  it,  and  you  will  find  that  a  good  harbor 
is  not  more  remote  from  any  spot  in  Ireland  than  thirty  miles. 
Why  is  not  the  country  prosperous  ?     Did  I  not  read  for  you 
of  the  unheard-of  magical  prosperity  that  followed  her  legis- 
lative independence  ?     Did  I  not  read  extracts  from  the  writ- 
ings and  speeches  of  men  most  adverse  to  Ireland — of  men 
most  anxious  to  conceal  her  greatness,  as  evidence  of  her 
increasing  prosperity  under  her  parliament  ?    What  happened 
once,  will  surely  happen  again. 

Oh,  gentlemen,  I  struggle  to  rescue  the  poor  fi'om  j)0verty, 
and  to  give  wages  and  employment  to  those  now  idle — to  keep 
our  gentry  at  home  by  an  absentee  tax  after  the  example  of 
the  government  of  last  year,  if  by  no  other  means,  and  com- 
pel them  to  do  their  duty  to  their  coimtry.  I  leave  the  case 
to  you— I  deny  that  there  is  anything  in  it  to  stain  me  with 

/ 


264;  SELECT  SPEECHES  OF    DANIEL  O'CONNELL. 

conspiracy.  I  reject  witli  contempt  the  appellation.  I  have 
acted  in  the  open  day  in  the  presence  of  the  government ;  in 
the  presence  of  the  magistrates  ;  nothing  was  secret,  private, 
or  concealed ;  there  was  nothing  but  what  was  exposed 
to  the  universal  world.  I  have  struggled  for  the  restoration 
of  the  parhament  to  my  native  country.  Others  have  succeed- 
ed in  their  endeavors,  and  some  have  failed ;  but,  succeed  or 
fail,  it  is  a  glorious  struggle.  It  is  a  struggle  to  make  the 
first  land  on  earth  possess  that  bounty  and  benefit  which  God 
and  nature  intended. 


Date  Due 

/^^ 

1 

,  lOd^ 

i 

*kW  \- 

^  BBli* 

' 

Jfli; 

1 5  1990 

MOV 

24 

DEC 

1  5  ?nn5 

(1 

PRINTED 

IN  U.  S.  A. 

126^40 


BOSTON  COLLEGE 


3  9031   01211255  3 


aA.4 


